The Idaho student murders case, involves the murder of four students (Ethan Chapin, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle, and Kaylee Gonclaves) – who shared a house, in Moscow, Idaho, with two others (in the affidavit, referred to as D.M., and B.F.) - who attended the University of Idaho. The suspect, at this time, Bryan Kohberger (age 28), is a graduate student at Washington State University, who appears to have been stalking one, or possibly more, of the victims – cellphone records have placed him in close proximity to the victims over a period of weeks leading up to the killings. Whilst, there may be much speculation over the killer’s motives, and the exact timeline of the events that occurred in the house, one of the key findings to come out of the investigation, is that one of the roommates (D.M.) had opened her door three times due to various noises (a man’s voice, crying, a dog barking etc.) she had heard (somewhere around 4:00 AM), and on the last occasion saw a masked man leave the house, after which she locked her door, however authorities weren’t called to the house until seven hours later. This has led to some degree of speculation as to why she did nothing, and whether she was in some way involved etc. It is easy to believe that we might act differently to others, given a certain situation e.g., we might watch a quiz show and give every correct answer to what we believe are easy questions, and wonder why a contestant on the show is having such difficulty etc., or we might believe that if we heard strange noises in the night, we would have gone and investigated, or at the very least called law enforcement etc. In this article I want to look at some of the reasons why people fail to act, in certain situations and why this is “natural”.

When we are confronted with a stressful and dangerous situation, one of our first responses/coping mechanisms is to go into a state of denial, or to discount the seriousness of what we are facing. It is easier for us to ignore or “explain” away what is happening to us rather than face and deal with it. It is one of the reasons why when we hear footsteps behind us, we rarely turn to investigate if someone is indeed following us. If we turn around, we are admitting to ourselves that we may have to confront a violent aggressor. It is much more comforting to believe that we are being paranoid and imagining things, or that the quickening footsteps behind us belong to someone who has no harmful intent towards us. The more reasons we have to explain something away, the more likely we are to do so. From details in the affidavit, it sounds like the student house was a fairly active one, late into the night and early morning e.g., Chaplin and Kernoodle had been at a sorority house between 9:00 pm and 12:45 am, whilst Gonclaves and Mogen had been at a club between 10 pm and 1:30 am, and Kernoodle received a Doordash delivery at 4:00 am, with phone records showing that Kernoodle was on TikTok at approximately 4:12 am etc. The house was a student house, with young people leading young people’s lives e.g., coming in late, staying up late etc. This meant that there probably wasn’t a stable baseline from which to judge what was out of the ordinary, making it easy to explain away noises such as somebody crying and/or an unfamiliar male voice etc. D.M.’s fear system and “gut instinct” correctly identified that something was wrong (this is why she opened her door to investigate three times), maybe that all of these different noises together, signaled danger, however she was probably able to rationalize each individual noise, and even the masked man leaving the house e.g., it could be someone leaving late with a mask around their nose and mouse due to a precaution against COVID and/or the cold etc. As human beings we are very adept at explaining away danger, so that we don’t have to deal with it.

Another factor that was probably also at play was the “Genovese” or Bystander Effect e.g., bystanders assume/think that someone else is intervening, and so they don’t need to. Research has shown that the more people who are present at an incident where some form of intervention is required, the less likely anyone will. At the time of the murders, six people were in the house. It would be easy to convince yourself that someone else might be investigating/dealing with the situation. Also, D.M., was on the ground floor of a three-floor building. The first murders took place on the top floor. There were people nearer to the source of the disturbance than her. She was the roommate furthest away from the initial incident and noise. It would be easy for a person in such a situation to assume/argue to themselves that if something was happening, then those closer were probably more likely to be investigating. Another factor to consider is that of “social awkwardness”. These were friends who lived together. If D.M. had tried to intervene in an argument/fight that didn’t concern her, or call the police etc., and she later found out that she’d overreacted or totally misjudged the situation, it could potentially create a socially awkward situation that she’d have to live with and experience on a daily basis. When you consider that this is the more likely reason for the noise(s) – rather than a multiple homicide – locking the door and going back to bed can make a lot of sense.

In Routine Activities Theory (RAT) for an offense to take place, there must be a: motivated offender, a suitable target, and the lack of a capable guardian. Whilst, it is easy to imagine and picture a motivated offender, and a suitable target, it is less easy to define who and/or what makes a capable guardian. In some cases, the presence of CCTV, or a pair of eyes on the street, who could witness an offense, may be the capable guardian that prevents a crime from occurring. However, it should be noted that people are actors who play different roles at different times etc. Sometimes an offender is motivated to commit a crime other times they are not, sometimes a person may be a suitable target, other times they may not. The same is also true of capable guardians. Sometimes individuals take on this role, other times they may not. Presented with a different set of circumstances, D.M., may well have behaved differently e.g., she may have called law enforcement; but when you are woken up at 4 am, by some strange noises that you are trying to make sense of, and then these stop etc., it is easy to play the “role” of the concerned but not overly concerned roommate. The fact that she didn’t investigate further and/or call law-enforcement makes – at the time – complete sense. However, what has been questioned is why it took so long for law enforcement to be called after the event; somewhere around seven hours. Again, when looking at student life, sleeping in late etc., maybe this length of time really isn’t so long.

At the end of the day it is easy to judge someone for not doing something, once some key facts become evident, and the reality of what happened is understood, but at 4 in the morning, interpreting some out of place noises and coming to the conclusion that what is happening is a multiple homicide committed by an intruder in the house, is a lot to ask. It is also easy to forget what student life is like, and how the noises in the house whilst enough to peak interest might not have been as out of place as they would be in a single family home etc. Couple all of this with our natural ability to deny and discount danger, especially when we might believe others will, and are better qualified, to deal with it, and locking a door and going back to bed becomes a lot more understandable. One of our confirmation biases, is that when we do something bad, or fail to act etc., it is down to external factors, but when others do or don’t do these same things it is down to who they are and their internal characteristics. Whilst, events may transpire that show D.M.’s account has gaps, and is fabricated etc., all of her actions, or lack of action, that we know of at this point, makes sense and can be explained.