A Theory of the Idaho Case
Which is highly speculative. But based on facts.
Morning folks, and we apologize for the delay in the latest Ops Desk dispatch. Your humble narrator has just returned from another trip to Idaho with the incisive Lawrence Jones, in relation to the terrible quadruple homicide in Moscow — leading to today’s offering of my theory of the case, below.
A caveat: This is just a theory, and it was developed, for the most part, in the dark. As I expounded on on America’s Newsroom Monday morning (see below — 21 degrees at air time), the Moscow PD has stopped giving press conferences, and its press releases have dwindled to a trickle. Very few investigative facts have been made public.
But one of the things that has been revelatory to me is how similar journalism is to policework (especially intelligence work); that is, you are highly dependent on your sources. And there are a few sources out there that I would characterize as having reliable info.
So the below is based on what I assess as solid information. Again, it is speculative, and is only intended for Ops Desk readers.
Problem #1: Why were four killed, and two left alive?
It seems likely that at least one of the four deceased was the main target (as per News Nation, that was Kaylee; as per Steve Goncalves, this conclusion can be drawn from the disparity in the injuries). So then: Why kill all four?
All of whom, according to the coroner, were killed in their beds while asleep?
My answer to this: One of the deceased was indeed the main target; the person lying next to the main target was killed because he/she was in bed with the target; and the other pair were killed to ensure their silence (more below).
Problem #2: How did the killer escape?
Having walked around the crime scene at length, taken photos, etc, I am surprised that the parking lot out back has not gotten more attention.
The house is backed to a hill. From the rear of the house there is a small bit of upwards-sloping woods, and then a small parking lot.
A view from the parking lot into the house’s second floor is clear and obvious (this is where the sliding glass doors are) (good photos of house interior here). The view is into the landing area of the second floor that is visible in this video, from Kaylee’s TikTok account.
My answer to how the killer escaped: He may well have fled in a car he had parked there. This accounts for why the bloodhounds did not pick up his trail when they were deployed at the investigation’s outset. He either drove the car there for this specific purpose, or was in the practice of leaving his car there (likely the former).
Problem #3: Why did the survivors on the first floor — and the dog — not react?
According to a former tenant in the house, it would not be unusual to not hear goings on elsewhere in the house. Further, the house was something of a party house, with students often coming and going.
The two girls downstairs had also been out for the night and returned about two-to-three hours before the murders. They were likely sleeping heavily at the time of the killings, and if they did awaken, it would’ve been easy to dismiss any noise as just another group of students who were prolonging their Saturday night.
As for the dog (“Murphy”): Murphy is approximately 84 in people years. He was also “not a barker” (as per my source), and was almost certainly used to people coming and going at all hours.
So then: What happened?
Here’s a possibility.
We know from the timeline that Xana and Ethan arrived home at 0145 hrs, with Kaylee and Madison arriving roughly seven minutes later (these times are likely so exact because the police have pulled the WiFi logs from the home — the WiFi router is visible under the television in the TikTok video linked above).
As such: all four victims were likely together around 0200 hrs.
But a fifth person may also have been there: the perpetrator.
It is not my belief he had secreted himself in the house somehow (a common theory bouncing around online) — had he done that, and remained hidden, there would be no reason to kill the non-targets. I believe he killed all four because all four victims somehow saw him there. (The other two girls, on the first floor, were already safely in bed).
I see two ways this could have happened.
The simplest: He entered the house from the rear, and his target was either Kaylee or Madison. He entered the second-floor bedroom believing his target might be there. She is not, and further, Ethan or Xana awakens. He must kill them both to silence them; they’ve seen him, and perhaps even know him.
He then ascends to the third floor in pursuit of his target. He ascends, rather than descends, either arbitrarily, or because he saw upstairs lights go on while he was secreted outside the house.
More complicated scenario: The perp is with Ethan and Xana (has to be them; he was not in the Uber with Kaylee and Madison). Or: he arrived at around 0200 as a friendly, and was admitted. The point is, all four victims are aware of his presence.
At some point, he decides he is going to commit murder. So: the perp leaves the house.
This is necessary, as all four victims go to bed. Unless they were all willing to go to bed and leave a non-resident awake in the house (one who would have to have had the foresight to bring a very large knife with him, and secrete it on his person), the perp likely left before they all went to bed — somewhere in the two o’clock hour.
The perp’s car is either in the parking lot at this time, or he goes and gets it — along with the knife. From the parking lot, he can then clearly see all have gone to bed (lights are out, etc).
He then re-enters the house through the back door. He attacks Ethan and Xana first — Ethan is the biggest threat to him.
He then ascends to attack the other pair. All four people who can place him at the house earlier are now deceased.
He is not concerned with the girls on the first floor — they’ve slept through the whole thing, and never saw him.
He then leaves through the rear sliding door. Again, having walked the area, the front door just feels way too exposed. I just don’t see him using it, either coming or going. (And yes, I am aware of reports of the open front door. For now, I’m sticking to the rear door as his exit point).
He ascends to the parking lot.
He is covered in blood, has a very large bloody knife on him, and likely has some cuts and scrapes of his own. He cannot flee very far on foot. It is Saturday night in a student area. Kids are returning from the bars downtown, other (non-student) residents are out walking their dogs, etc. He is not running around the neighborhood in that condition.
So he gets in the car and flees, taking the murder weapon with him. As this scenario posits that he is likely a student, I believe he leaves town — blowing off his Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday classes (which were scheduled for Thanksgiving week).
(This, btw, is an investigative opportunity. Who didn’t show up for classes that week, even before the option of remote learning was offered? Whose key card didn’t swipe at the university all that week?).
The bodies are discovered the next morning by one of the housemates. As per my sourcing, the 911 call — and the other students who were “summoned” to the house before the police were called (one of which was potentially a fraternity member, the other likely Ethan’s brother) — are not material to the investigation.
The patrol officer who responds actually does do a solid job of keeping the two interior crime scenes protected. The investigation begins.
Now: This all argues for a decent amount of planning by the perp. Did he pick that weekend so that he could leave for the Thanksgiving break, giving him extra days to be away from the investigation? A possibility. He also would have had to work out having the car there somehow.
But most importantly: he would have to have known to have his phone either off, or not with him. He could have no digital evidence of his having been in that cell zone, at that time of night. He also could not have his phone hit the house WiFi that night.
Are there counter-arguments to this? Sure. As I said on the air Monday, every theory of this case has a counterfactual that confounds it. Too lengthy to go into here.
But as I run through all this, I keep returning to: There was one target. That target’s bedmate was killed because he/she was lying next to the target. And the other pair were killed to ensure their silence.
For me, with the limited knowledge we have at this point, that is the foundation.
And for the record: I still believe they will get him — and that this case is far from cold.
Mind The Gap: Your narrator has expounded at length and in various forums regarding the mysterious gap in the timeline for Xana and Ethan that night (see here for our early timeline).
I was therefore gratified to see the recent press release from Moscow PD directly address this issue. That part of my observations, at least, appears accurate.
But here’s the thing: Do the police truly not know where the pair were? Even with their phones being almost certainly with them and hitting the town cell towers?
Or do the police actually know approximately where they were (Xana’s mother recently stated she was told they went to a bar). If so, perhaps what the police really want to know is: Who was with them?
And perhaps came home with them?
In light of my above theory, the missing five hours could grow in importance.
NYPD News: As was widely reported last week, there were big changes in executive leadership at the NYPD. Most observers read the moves as Mayor Adams beginning to fully put his stamp on his vision of the Department.
Whether all this will have any effect on dwindling confidence in City Hall and its promises of public safety remains to be seen.
But frankly, it seems unlikely. The simple fact is, the Mayor can play musical chairs all he wants. But until Albany changes the ludicrous bail and discovery laws, and the City Council rescinds the diaphragm law and the elimination of qualified immunity — and stops issuing press releases like this one — New York City will continue to decline.
When will the Mayor begin to truly voice this obvious fact? As we noted here in “Adam’s Choice” — if he doesn’t pick a side soon, his will be a failed mayoralty.
One hopeful sign: the leadership of the Department’s counter terrorism program was kept intact. Being very familiar with those executives and units, the institutional knowledge and expertise that reside there is — nationally — second to none.
As an NYC resident, I can say: I’m grateful that that part, at least, City Hall got right.
Speaking of Counter Terrorism: New York, where aspiring terrorists looking to shoot up a synagogue make bail.
Compare that to the case of Ahmed Ferhani, New York’s first use of state terrorism statutes, in 2012. He was convicted of conspiring to do the same thing. (Full disclosure: Your narrator supervised the Ferhani case).
If Alvin Bragg had been Manhattan DA in 2012, Ferhani would probably be in the City Council today.
Targeted, Indeed: The epidemic of shoplifters in NYC is far from a victimless crime, as many of our District Attorneys contend. Stores everywhere are closing, as the tiny profit margin most operate off of is destroyed by (mostly) vagrants who help themselves (my drugstores keep closing on me; I’m on my third one just to get my prescriptions) (here is what it tends to look like).
But what is less discussed is that shoplifting often leads to violence; I’ve seen a number of instances of security tussling with characters who, frankly, have nothing to lose.
And now, this lovely tale of holiday New York — in which a security guard and a 16 year-old (alleged!) shoplifter fall down an elevator shaft at Target while doing battle.
This being the Bronx: the perp’s DAT was probably signed before they hit bottom.
You Must Be High: At this rate, the only stores open in New York are going to be these smoke shops springing up everywhere, selling unregulated weed. But: because they can’t use the banking system — marijuana is still illegal federally — these businesses are all cash. Which leads to — you guessed it! — robberies (and tax fraud, of course. Who pays tax on cash?).
But sure — marijuana is going to be a boon to NYC. Right. That’s the answer!
As an NYC resident, I’d like to ask City Hall what Casey Stengel asked the 1962 Mets: Can’t anyone here play this game?
Broken Windows, Broken Hearts: So broken windows policing doesn’t work?
Damn fossil fuels! Can’t live with ‘em…. Um, is anyone else alarmed by this?
And finally…. Having just returned from northern Idaho, and seen how the hardy residents there cope: this is something I suspect they never do.
That’s all for now folks. Thanks for tuning in. We’ll be back soon with some suggested investigative steps for the Idaho case, and a take on the Griner - Viktor Bout swap (which your narrator has something of a connection to, and no shortage of opinions on).
Meantime, Chris will be up tomorrow with a new Weekend Buff.
In the meantime… stay safe!