Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Bryan Kohberger Explains His 'Odd' Behavior

Episode Date: April 17, 2025

Bryan Kohberger's lawyers want to tell the jury in his murder trial that he has been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder. They say it will explain his lack of emotion when graphic crime scene photos are displayed or when he doesn't react to emotional testimony. Kohberger's lawyers say the media has described him as "a monster" and his ASD explains his physical characteristics and why he might make a bad witness. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy looks at everything we know about the issue in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Go to https://thrivemarket.com/CrimeFix to receive 30% off your first order AND a FREE gift when you join Thrive Market today!Host:Angenette Levy  https://twitter.com/Angenette5Producer:Jordan ChaconCRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Daniel CamachoGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law & Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. The jury needs to know from the very outset that they will hear testimony about Mr. Koberger's autism spectrum disorder. Brian Koberger's lawyers are pushing to tell the jury that he's on the autism spectrum, arguing it explains how he looks. We have extensive media coverage that refers to him as evil, as an incel, as looking like a monster. The judge questioning whether it's necessary. I will say, having seen Mr. Kohlberger over numerous days now, I haven't seen anything unusual in terms of his demeanor. Plus, the defense says Kohlberger couldn't have possibly carried out the murders.

Your Honor, we have produced an expert that believes that it's likely that there were two people, two weapons. Welcome to Crime Fix. I'm Anjanette Levy. Brian Koberger claims he has autism spectrum disorder, and he and his lawyers want to tell the jury that when his trial starts later this year. Now, you might be asking yourself, why? Why does this matter in a murder trial? Well, there are a couple of things Koberger is trying to do here. First, his lawyers want to tell the jury about his autism diagnosis to explain his appearance and possible lack of emotion. And they're asking Judge Hippler to strike the death penalty because of the diagnosis. And let me tell you, that could be a tough sell. So I thought we should look at everything we know about Brian Koberger's autism diagnosis and his other psychological and neurological issues that he claims he has and why his lawyers

don't believe he could physically carry out these murders in just a matter of minutes. We'll have more on that shortly. Koberger's lawyers say he maintains his innocence in the murders of Maddie Mogan, Kaylee Gonsalves, Ethan Chapin, and Zanna Carnodle in the home on King Road in November of 2022. Now, in the last couple of months, the defense has filed motions saying that Brian Koberger has been diagnosed with autism. Koberger's lawyers say the autism diagnosis explains a lot about their client's appearance, and they want to tell the jury about it. The minute he is sitting in a courtroom and the first time that a jury starts to look at him, they are going to be evaluating his physical presence.

They will be judging his facial expressions, his posture, his movements, his interactions with counsel, his responses to evidence that is up on the screen, his responses to emotional testimony, and his eyes. The jury will be studying literally everything about him. We must, as his attorneys, be able to tell the jury an opening statement that he has autism spectrum disorder and that they will hear testimony that it is a neurological and physical condition or a developmental disorder. Studies show that jurors pass judgment on the physical presentation of the accused. But prosecutor Bill Thompson doesn't believe Koberger's autism is relevant at all. They express concern about how the defendant's demeanor is going to present to the jury as the defendant is just sitting in the courtroom at counsel table like he is right now and assert

that they should be able to offer evidence that the defendant has autism and these other disorders that make him appear, I guess, arguably in, like he's not involved or something in a negative fashion. The defendant cites no authority for this, and indeed, I'm not aware of any authority. We can't find any authority to say that the defense can come in and even before jury selection say, okay, ladies and gentlemen of the prospective jury, here's this expert testimony that our defendant has this developmental condition, this autism condition, and so he might appear different in court. And so please don't hold that against him. There's just simply no basis for that. And we looked for that. It's irrelevant to any of the factual issues in this case. It's irrelevant to the elements of the offense.

Frankly, all it does is confuse and try to play the sympathies of the jury, which is exactly what Rule 403 would prohibit. Now, Judge Hippler, if you've watched any of the hearings, seems to really take a no-nonsense approach to most matters. And he questioned how he could handle this issue with the jury while following the law in Idaho. They're not supposed to consider the demeanor of the witness. Now, I will say, having seen Mr. Kohlberger over numerous days now, I haven't seen anything unusual in terms of his demeanor. But, you know, I'm not, you know, scrutinizing him on YouTube the way maybe others are. But I understand your concern, and I'm not trying to downplay it. I'm just trying to understand how I get there in light of the legal requirements that I'm supposed to tell the jury,

don't consider any of that. Maybe the way is to say, you know, the way the parties appear, what happens at counsel table is not evidence. You shouldn't be concerned about it, and it should play no role in your decision. Would that do it? Judge, the proper way to do this is through testimony. I just went through a litany of cases where that's what the courts have said in other states is the way to handle it. I don't think those cases were cited to it. They're not Idaho cases, no. But then it's an issue of first impression here, right?

And so you get to make the decision and you can get it right. You can allow the testimony. If you are serious about boosting your energy and improving your overall health, the food you choose is key, but let's get real. Shopping for healthy, sustainable food can be really overwhelming. That's where Thrive Market comes in. Thrive Market is my go-to for healthy, sustainable groceries. And the best part, it's delivered right to my door. With Thrive Market, I get access to thousands of high-quality brands with products guaranteed at the lowest price. Everything from pantry staples to eco-friendly cleaning supplies. Plus, their commitment to sustainability means I'm not only taking care of myself, but the planet too. And

with their easy-to-use website and app, I can filter by dietary preferences, whether you're keto, gluten-free, vegan, or just trying to make healthier swaps. Thrive Market has something for everyone. I found some amazing high protein snacks like Catalina Crunch cinnamon toast cereal. It's perfect for my midday cravings, which I get a lot. Every product is carefully vetted by Thrive Market's expert team for its quality and ethical sourcing, so I feel good about what I'm putting on my table and into my body.

So if you're ready to make healthy food shopping as easy as a few clicks, check out Thrive Market and scan the QR code on your screen, click the link in the description or head to thrivemarket.com slash crime fix to get 30% off your first order and get a free gift when you join Thrive Market today. Trust me, you will not regret it. The defense also argues that Brian Koberger's autism diagnosis

will make him a poor witness. As a poor witness, he has difficult picking up on nonverbal cues. Tone and cadence are abnormal. Affect is stiff and language is disorganized, repetitive and oddly formal. He really struggles with making decisions, such as, like I expressed, the decision to testify. He needs instructions repeated to him. He's easily distracted on what is happening around him or so focused that he's lost in the big picture. He perseverates on unimportant details, and these are symptoms of his disability that will either unfairly keep him from testifying on his own behalf or alienate him from a jury and make him easily trapped on cross-examination. And the double-edged sword applies as well, because the stoic affect and incongruent facial expressions may be seen as a lack of remorse,

an inability to react to emotional moments, moments that call for emotion, which is often an aggravating factor for juries. Now, we haven't really seen Brian Koberger speak often at all. The most we've seen him talk is in this traffic stop from October of 2022 in Pullman, Washington. light turns red then you're stuck in the intersection then you run the red light so that's reason I stopped you do you have your license on you do you have the registration and insurance Let me just get this for you out. You what? I'm just going to get this out for you. Okay.

Yeah, there was a little bit of confusion with speeding because someone had stopped. I wasn't sure what they were doing, and then they put on their light to turn. So I thought that maybe they were letting me go through. Oh. Did you see that? No. Yeah, like right before I made the turn, there was someone who made a right. They didn't have their signal on, so I wasn't sure if they were just waiting.

So that's how Brian Koberger speaks. Court documents claim Koberger has level one autism, which is high functioning. His attorneys admit it's a recent diagnosis, but he had been evaluated as a child. The impairments that he has go all the way back to his very young years where he walked on his tippy toes, rocked on all fours for extended periods of time, could not engage in imaginative play, wrote his fives upside down and backward. He was provided with extensive supports in school. He was evaluated for ASD, but not properly diagnosed. And bring that to current time where he is at age 28, where he has few personal relationships. He does not have any insight into things like the fact that he once volunteered at the Special Olympics is mitigating, or that he helped save someone's life on the job,

and that's mitigating. He can see the logic in the word mitigation, but he has no ability to understand and help us develop a case for him for mercy. His demeanor, he has a limited range of facial expression, odd eye contact, and intense gaze with subtle rocking, sitting very still. This is important because of the impact that jurors assigned and give tremendous weight to perceived remorse or the lack thereof. Now get this, Koberger's lawyer, Alyssa Masseth, even had kind of a warning for Judge Hipler about his decision on whether the jury will hear about Koberger's autism. There's one other way that I want you to think about this, one other frame of mind. Imagine if you do not let this testimony in in phase one of the trial and the jury convicts Mr. Koberger. How angry and misled might those jurors feel

when they learn in mitigation, where without a doubt this comes in at mitigation, that he has this disorder and it has them second guessing themselves. We must avoid that possibility. We ask for an order to allow its admission. The defense even said they don't want Koberger's autism diagnosis used against him if the case reaches the penalty phase. And Ann Taylor even told Judge Hipler that Koberger's autism explains how he interacts with other people. But Your Honor, when I look through the mounds of discovery, there are probably 100 hours of interviews of people that Mr. Koberger went to school with at WSU. And, of course, those interviews come just hours and days after the headlines hit

that Mr. Koberger's been arrested in this case. And people that he went to school with, that he interacted with, had unkind things to say about him. And a lot of their unkind things, when you understand them in the context of autism, the way he may stand in a room near a doorway, the way he may look too long at a person, their interviews are different when you know he has autism and you know the characteristics he displays. But those awful comments, those mean comments about him, if the state uses those as aggravators, that's using his autism characteristics. Assistant Attorney General Jeff Nye had this to say about Koberger's autism

and possibly using it against him. The state has no plans whatsoever to use the autism during the penalty phase as any kind of aggravation whatsoever. There is no plan to put on students from the university to talk about their personal views of this individual. To be quite frank, if we get to a penalty phase, we have a lot better aggravating evidence than the fact that he has level one autism. And frankly, it's just not a persuasive argument to ask a jury to impose the penalty of death because someone has autism.

Now, Koberger's lawyers have also argued that he has obsessive compulsive disorder, and that's why he was wearing gloves and placing his trash in Ziploc bags when he was arrested. And they say he has dexterity issues and that that makes it impossible for him to have committed these murders and removed bloody clothes in a matter of minutes. Your Honor, we have produced an expert that believes that it's likely that there were two people, two weapons.

That doesn't testimony about the degree of intoxication goes to the, what I'm assuming was given that degree of intoxication, the ability to fight back. In rebuttal to your experts, as I understand it. I think that's what the state says. I don't think that they intend to put on. We are not contesting the intoxication level of any of the deceased. I understand your argument. Now, the defense theory about two killers will likely play off the fact that two sources of male DNA were found inside and outside of the King Road house. One was a spot of blood on a

stairwell and another was on a pair of gloves outside. That DNA was never identified. And Koberger's lawyers say they've discovered another possible suspect. I think I've read most of the police reports in this case, but I haven't read the thousands and thousands and thousands of tips that came in on this case. Don't think they're all not relevant though. Recently, we came across a tip just in trying to work through some of these issues. We came across a tip that would appear to be an alternate suspect. And we're trying to work through that as rapidly as we can. It was quite a surprise to come up with that. There's got to be more in there that I need to know. I want to bring in Dr. Daniel Bober. He's a forensic psychiatrist. So Dr. Bober, we've now heard the arguments from both

the defense and the prosecution about Brian Koberger and this autism diagnosis. He has, I guess, what would typically be discussed or described as Asperger's syndrome, autism one. The prosecution doesn't seem to think that this is relevant, but the defense is saying the jury should hear about this because this is going to explain his demeanor, his flat affect, and the fact that if he sees really gory crime scene photos and things like that, there's going to be zero reaction. What are your thoughts on that argument? Well, you know, Anjanette, we all see the world through our own lens, right? People who are diagnosed with autism, they have features such as restricted or repetitive movements, but they also have deficits in social communication, reciprocity. And so their responses

to things may not be typical in the same way that you and I respond to things. And when you take the same facts, you can tell a very different story. For example, if someone with autistic spectrum disorder, and we say it's on a spectrum because some people have more deficits than others and their own challenges, and a jury is observing you in the courtroom, you may appear flat. You may appear unresponsive, and that may be taken as cold callousness a lack of empathy but then there are also people with autistic spectrum disorder who are highly reactive and dysregulated so how are you going to interpret that so it really depends on how you tell the story and how you interpret it. As a forensic psychiatrist, you know, because the judge

is going to have to determine whether the jury should hear about this in the so-called, you know, the guilt phase, not if it reaches a penalty phase, if it comes in and mitigation, but whether or not the defense, they want to tell the jury in opening statements that he has autism spectrum disorder. So, I mean, and they cited a number of cases in other states. What are your feelings on that? I mean, is this kind of like it seems like it's new, you know, new territory in Idaho. So is this something maybe the defense should be allowed to tell the jury? I do think that they should be allowed to tell the jury because I think it is relevant to his

mental state when he committed the crime. But again, this is a situation where there's a lot of key pieces of evidence here. You know, whether we're talking about the masks that he purchased at the sporting goods store, the movements of his car, his cell phone, surveillance footage, the fact that he was casing the scene. They have a lot of pieces of evidence to work with here, but I do think that fact that he was diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder is relevant to his mental state because we know people with autistic spectrum disorder, although it is not connected or associated with violence, it does affect the way that they see the world, the way that they react to other people and their interpersonal interactions.

So I do think it's relevant from that perspective. Well, they're saying that this is because in Idaho, I guess you can't say, you know, there's no like insanity defense, things like that. So they're saying this is like a neurological, biological condition. And you know, they're, they're saying he's innocent. So they're, they're, they're more worried about his, his demeanor in court, his flat affect. The fact that he, I guess, has been described in the media. They focused a lot, too, on how he's been described in the media as looking having dark eyes. And they claim that he's been described as looking like a monster and an incel and things of that nature. So I don't know how persuasive that would be to the judge.

But I find it interesting that you think that they should be able to tell the jury in opening statements that he has autism spectrum disorder and this may impact how he appears in the courtroom. Well, listen, you know, juries are imperfect. They have their own biases. They have their own prejudices. And if we're sitting on a jury, even though we're told that we're supposed to consider the evidence, ultimately, we're going to be looking at the demeanor of the defendant sitting at the table. Does he seem like he cares? Do I look at him and do I see someone that's capable of a crime like this? These are things that obviously should not play into it, but it's human nature and it's just the way that we interpret the world. We try to look at people and we try to think would they do something, would we do the same

thing, you know? We try to relate to them and people with autism or autistic spectrum disorder by their nature have trouble with relatability, relating to other people, interpreting their emotions, reacting appropriately in certain situations. So I do think from that perspective, it is relevant to how he behaves in court. Really interesting. What I find interesting too is the defense is saying that he was evaluated when he was younger for autism spectrum disorder, but not diagnosed, but he was evaluated. They said that he would do things like rock back and forth. He'd walk on his tippy toes, write his fives upside down. He had, I guess, some characteristics of somebody who might have

autism spectrum disorder. And now at age 28, he has been formally diagnosed. What do you think of that? Is that something that is maybe common? And I say that because I keep seeing this popping up in the news recently that autism diagnosis, these diagnoses are increasing. So is there more awareness of it? So that's an excellent point. Now, we have expanded the criteria for autistic spectrum disorder. We are also looking at it more or looking for it more. So it may create in some

way the appearance that there are more cases, but then there is something to that. The diagnoses, the number of diagnoses have increased. We don't exactly know why that is. It's probably multifactorial, but that's why autistic spectrum disorder is on a spectrum, right? So maybe some people have problems with language, with social reciprocity. Maybe some of the people have problems with these repetitive behaviors or these restricted interests.

But the point is, there are some people who have autistic spectrum disorder, and that encompasses the old name Asperger's disorder, who are very highly functioning. I know other physicians, other colleagues who I work with who are functioning people in this world who are physicians who treat patients every day, and they are on the autistic spectrum. So there is a tremendous amount of variability in functionality and productivity and life success with people who are on the spectrum. And it could be from someone who is completely debilitated and dysregulated and someone who is highly functioning. And we probably know people who are actors, celebrities, CEOs that are in the news currently that have been said to have had autistic spectrum disorder.

But yet they are billionaires. They are super successful. So there is a wide variability on that spectrum. Yeah, I mean, Elon Musk comes to mind. I think they've said that he's on the spectrum. So let's talk now. The prosecution basically says, you know, the only reason, you know, the jury's not supposed to consider his demeanor, that if he's testifying that this should be relevant, but the, you know, the defense is saying, well, this will make him a bad witness, you know? And so we should be able to tell him, tell the jury that he's has autism spectrum disorder.

He's on the spectrum. But the prosecution saying like, no, you know, and only if we open the door, should this come in? And then the defense also wants the death penalty stricken because of this. I'm not sure the judge is going to do that. I don't think he's going to strike the death penalty. Yeah, I mean, you really you find the witness as they are, right? So if they happen to be handicapped, if they happen to be in a wheelchair, if they happen to be blind, if they happen to be diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder. I guess it's one of those things where when juries look at someone on the stand who's diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder, if they're in a wheelchair, you can see that

they're in a wheelchair. But if you don't know that they're diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder, you may interpret their behaviors in a certain way and because you're not looking at it through that lens, it may cause you to have an adverse opinion of them. So I understand the defense's point in wanting to do that because they're trying to obviously protect their client, they're trying to portray their client in the most favorable light but I just don't know from a legal standpoint or in terms of the rules of evidence that they can really do that. And I guess it's ultimately him to carry out these homicides.

They want to talk about him having OCD, obsessive compulsive disorder, and that could be why he was wearing gloves and putting his trash in baggies when he was arrested. As a forensic psychiatrist, are those things a stretch for you? So that's interesting, right? So again, same piece of information, very different story, right? So people with OCD have compulsions that are driven by anxiety-related intrusive thoughts. They're trying to conceal a crime, that is very goal-directed behavior. That's done to avoid consequences. So you're looking at very different motivations for the same behavior, which could be interpreted multiple ways.

But I think at that point, it starts to look like, wow, they're really looking for a convenient excuse as to why he's trying to hide the fact that he's concealing evidence. So it kind of rings a little bit disingenuous. But again, they're doing everything they can to try to protect their client and ultimately exonerate him. Yeah. Well, it will be interesting to see what the judge decides on these issues. Dr. Daniel Bober, thank you so much. My pleasure. Judge Hippler has not yet ruled on any of these motions regarding Brian Koberger's autism

diagnosis or whether or not he will strike the death penalty because of it. And that's it for this episode of Crime Fix. I'm Anjanette Levy. Thanks so much for being with me. I'll see you back here next time.