Humans tend to assign narratives to observations where sufficient facts are not provided. We do this so our brains know how to classify the experience so we can refer to and properly navigate it should we reencounter it.
A good example is how our brains can’t discern between anxiety and excitement. In both cases, we experience the same emotional and physical responses, i.e., sweaty palms, butterflies, etc. We can only differentiate between the two based on what we tell our brain is happening. The problem is that our assessments are prone to inaccuracy.
We’ve been provided little in the way of details of the night of the Idaho 4 Murders. That lack of information has created a feeding frenzy. If there’s one thing that fired up our brains, it’s a puzzle. Brains crave familiarity. With so few clues, our brain’s disdain for the unknown is causing many of us to fill in the blanks. It does this because it needs an explanation for why and how this happened so it doesn’t happen to us.
Unfortunately, the surviving roommates of the Idaho 4 Murders are bearing the brunt of our brain’s need to solve this mystery.
Listen to the episode for:
A forensic expert’s take on the lack of a blood trail in and out of the house.
Kaylee’s mom’s interview about what happened the morning after and who the roommates called.
My theory of how the night unfolded, why no one heard anything, and why Dylan didn’t call 911.
You can become a subscriber to listen to the full episode.
Related Links
Listen to this episode with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Character Analysis to listen to this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.
