Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Bryan Kohberger Hearing Erupts in Heated Face-Off: 'I'm Angry!'

Starting point is 00:00:00 Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Nothing that was done is worth the hysteria and the hyperbole that keeps getting expressed in this courtroom. Brian Koberger's defense team pushing back against claims their survey of potential jurors violated a gag order and tainted the jury pool while prosecutors cede no ground on the issue. If it can't be done right, or if that's what it takes to do it right, then we need to do it. This is a big case. And the finger for this cannot be pointed at anybody but the defense. Thanks for joining me for Crime Fix. I'm Ann Jeanette Levy. Things are certainly heating up in Brian Koberger's case. Typically, things are pretty

Starting point is 00:00:58 cordial between Prosecutor Bill Thompson and Koberger's defense attorney, Ann Taylor. She actually worked for him many years ago. But things have changed a little bit and become more tense since the prosecution found out that the defense commissioned a survey of potential jurors in Latah County, Idaho. Koberger has maintained his innocence in the murders of four University of Idaho students, Maddie Mogan, Kaylee Gonsalves, Ethan Chapin, and Zanna Cronodal. Prosecutor Bill Thompson talked about the survey questions that were asked to the 400 residents in Laytaw County by phone. He claims those violated the court's non-dissemination

Starting point is 00:01:36 order. They included things like, did you know Brian Koberger was arrested at his parents' house in Pennsylvania? Did you know DNA found on the knife sheath matched Brian Koberger, was arrested at his parents' house in Pennsylvania. Did you know DNA found on the knife sheath matched Brian Koberger? And the state's position is that the facts specific questions, and I understand, Dr. Edelman, why the questions were asked. I understand his explanation. It doesn't change the fact that we have a non-dissemination order that specifically prohibits that kind of dissemination of facts, specific facts about this case. But there were questions that contained false information that really got the prosecutor mad, specifically when Bill Thompson cross-examined Dr. Brian Edelman, who's conducting the survey. Take a look.

Starting point is 00:02:19 You acknowledge false that Mr. Kober allegedly stalked one of the victims. That's false. You know that to be false. Which one? That Mr. Kger allegedly stalked one of the victims. That's false. You know that to be false. Which one? That Mr. Koberger allegedly stalked one of the victims. Yes, I was trying not to say that. But you knew that was false. I did. So we learned something new there.

Starting point is 00:02:38 A couple of media outlets had reported that Brian Koberger stalked one of the victims in the months before the murders. The prosecutor now says that's not true. But back to the issue at hand. The prosecution believes Dr. Edelman's methods tainted the jury pool and violated the gag order. Things got a little spicy. I'm sorry if you're feeling hurt about us reading this issue. I see you were almost breaking down with two minutes ago when you were talking about slide number 33, slide number 35. That's not

Starting point is 00:03:12 the intent. And certainly, I'm surprised to see that reaction from an experienced expert such as yourself. So I apologize for that. I accept your apology. But the idea of after working really hard 15 years to develop a credible reputation and being told watching on a Zoom that I am tainting

Starting point is 00:03:34 the jury board and poisoning the jury board and contaminating the jury board by doing what's required and standard, I'm not crying. I'm angry. Yes, it doesn't matter. Ed, please go ahead and be as angry as you like as you continue your work for the defense in this case. So you probably detected a little sarcasm there from the prosecutor. The defense, meanwhile, fighting back against the

Starting point is 00:03:58 claim that their expert violated that non-dissemination order. We didn't violate the non-dissemination order. You know, the information that now he's calling facts, you know, it's flip-flopping between whether or not it's a false fact or a fact that's in the survey. The information that was put in the survey is based on the public record and information the way that state and state actors put information into the public record

Starting point is 00:04:26 that has now been disseminated. And we have not violated that order. And I do resent being accused of that. But Judge John Judge said there were questions featured in the survey that included false information that may have been featured in media reports or on social media, but those were not discussed in an actual public document or record, and that concerned him. I mean, those two questions were not in the public record. They were. I mean, it came out, but that was not the court, I mean, where it came from. It just came out of the media or somewhere. Who knows where it came from? But I don't think there's anything, not that I'm aware of, in the public record that said anything about that about your client. Dr. Edelman testified that he knew about the non-dissemination order.

Starting point is 00:05:35 Did the existence of the non-dissemination order change how you did your work? No, it did not. Have you worked in cases where there's a non-dissemination order at other times? Many times. And he said that just three to four percent of the people surveyed in Latah County didn't know about the case. The number of people in Latah County who did know about the case and had feelings about it was much, much higher. Because we asked these questions, what we found is that, like I said, very high recognition rates. So 79% of respondents knew at least five of these items. So the idea that we're

Starting point is 00:06:13 undermining his due process rights, everybody knows all this stuff. It's very high rates. 82% of respondents who recognize seven of these items or more reported that he's guilty, compared to if they only knew two or fewer, only 29% thought he was guilty. And the average was 6.2. The average number of these details people already know, 6.2. And Dr. Edelman explained that the information he included in his questions came from media reports and the affidavit filed in support of the murder charges. Information that was already out in the public.

Starting point is 00:06:49 What I did, to be clear, is the standard practice in the industry done hundreds of times in high profile cases throughout this country. There's nothing I did to contaminate the jury. Everything I included was widely disseminated by the media in this county hundreds of times, if not more. Most of it came directly from an affidavit that the government released in a press conference and encouraged everyone to report. Did I tell you what questions to ask? You did not. Would you take my advice if I told you what questions to ask? I did not. Would you take my advice if I told you what questions to ask? I would not. And I'll tell you why.

Starting point is 00:07:28 As I mentioned, my role is to be an objective expert to provide the court with information so the court can make a decision on if any remedial measures are necessary. I don't care what questions you want in the survey, and I don't care what questions the government wants in the survey. What I want to do is conduct a valid survey that's objective, reliable, and provides meaningful information that can be used by the court. I'll get you back to this update on Brian Koberger's case in just a moment, but I want to take a moment to tell you about Sheath Underwear. It's a really great company. My husband absolutely loves Sheath because they make the most comfortable underwear he's ever worn.

Starting point is 00:08:05 I mean, it feels like a soft cloud. I actually have a pair of them right here, and they also offer a lot of support. He also says the fit is amazing. So if you're sick of those plain old boxers that were way too loose, sheath fits really, really well. It's also worth noting that as the weather continues to warm up, sheath is really great at staying cool, especially if you're working out, which a lot of people do seven days a week. Sheath has brand new materials too, like bamboo and mesh for even more cooling comfort. So it's really great if you're hot, it's not sticking to you like a lot of other products can do.

Starting point is 00:08:41 Right now, you can go to sheathunderwear.com slash crimefix for 20% off of your order. Again, that's sheathunderwear.com slash crimefix to get 20% off a truly comfortable pair of underwear. I think you should check it out. Judge Judge did not make a decision on whether the survey would start over or whether it could continue in other counties. Judge Judge pushed back the hearing for the change of venue motion to the end of June, which probably is going to push everything in this case back. Alan Turkheimer is a jury consultant and he has conducted these surveys in the past. So Alan, what are your thoughts on the questions that Dr. Edelman asked to potential jurors?

Starting point is 00:09:23 I think he's doing what he wants to do to try to get the result that he's hoping to get. And that happens all the time. Maybe he pushed things a little too much and is testing the limits by having some questions in there that aren't necessarily true. But then again, from the defense perspective, it's not always about what is truthful. It's about what potential jurors believe. And if they believe something that's not truthful or that hasn't happened, they need to know about it. And I think that's a perspective he's taking with this survey and those questions that straddle the line of, did it really happen versus was it possibly reported that way?

Starting point is 00:09:58 He offered an explanation for why he had to put false information in there. And he said it was really to test bias and that this is something he's done in the past. What is your response to that? I think he gets some credibility by having experience doing this in the past. Now, every case is different. So he could say that he's done this in the past and maybe didn't have an issue with it. But of course, he probably was in a, certainly was in a different county, was a different trial, different set of circumstances. So it's good that he has this experience and seems to know what he's doing. But that doesn't mean that he can take the kind of liberties that he may have taken if the judge says it's not OK.

Starting point is 00:10:37 Now, it's very clear, very, very clear that the prosecution wants this trial held in Latah County. They don't want this trial moved. So that's why they're having so much heartburn over there. So they're saying, well, you know, really our issue is the fact that this violated the non-dissemination order. False information was put out there. The judge shared that concern. You know, he said, we've tried to keep the noise out of this case. The prosecution is contending that is their concern at this point in time, whether or not this messed with the non-dissemination order. Your thoughts on that? Do you really think that crossed the line? I think it approached it and got very close to it.

Starting point is 00:11:15 And the judge might think that it did cross the line. And we can understand the prosecution's perspective that they want to have this in the county, but there are a limited number of jury eligibles or potential jurors in the county. With just under 40,000 people in the county, you start to winnow that down in terms of who's jury eligible and then who's able to serve. And even though the trial's a long ways away, the prosecution just wants the status quo and doesn't want any influence or anything to happen to the potential jury pool. That's why they're so upset about this, where the defense thinks they have a legitimate reason to get it moved. And so they are putting together this survey to look at the results just so they can go to the judge and say, look, this is a scientific

Starting point is 00:12:00 tested study. And we don't think that Mr. Kohlberg can get a fair trial here in Latah County. Dr. Edelman also stated that the non-dissemination order, he was aware of it, and it didn't impact how he conducted his work. And he actually took offense at some of the things that the prosecution said, basically almost imp basically that almost implying that he was tainting the jury pool. Right. That's the argument the prosecution makes. And Dr. Edelman, who's done this in the past, he has his own agenda and only he knows exactly what the purpose was. Now, he's clearly wanting to learn more about the venue and he wants to detect bias. And so I can see why he'd be offended by these allegations, because it's a

Starting point is 00:12:45 serious charge to say that somebody is trying to taint or tarnish prospective jurors in a case. Now, a lot of times it could be middle ground where he's really not trying to do that, but maybe the results of the survey are having that effect. And so the judge has a lot to sort through to decide what he wants to do moving forward. He really does. And basically, Dr. Edelman said, if we're going to do this survey, if I'm going to continue, it has to be done the same way in every county, because then you have to start over. You can't just switch it up or else it's not scientific. He says he's looking at conducting an objective survey. And Judge Judge hasn't made a decision on any of this just yet. It sounds like he's not going to say they violated the gag order. He basically said

Starting point is 00:13:29 that yesterday. So the hearing on change of venue, though, has been pushed back till the end of June. It's an interesting issue, and it's getting a lot of attention. Alan Turkheimer, thanks so much for coming on. My pleasure. Thanks for having me. And that's it for this episode of Crime Fix. I'm Ann Jeanette Levy. Thanks so much for being with me. I'll see you back here next time.

Pet Camera - EBO Air 2

Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Bryan Kohberger Hearing Erupts in Heated Face-Off: 'I'm Angry!'

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.

Your Ad Here

Pet Camera - EBO Air 2

Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Bryan Kohberger Hearing Erupts in Heated Face-Off: 'I'm Angry!'

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.