Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Bryan Kohberger Judge Sets Trial Date as Victims' Families Demand Justice

Episode Date: June 28, 2024

Nearly two years after four University of Idaho students were murdered in a home off-campus, a trial date has been set for the man charged in the murders. Bryan Kohberger faces the possibility of the death penalty if convicted of murdering Maddie Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Ethan Chapin and Xana Kernodle. The case has a massive amount of evidence which has delayed the proceedings but Judge John Judge has made no secret of his desire to get the case moving toward trial. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy discusses the 2025 trial date with Shanon Gray, the attorney for the Goncalves family in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:If you’ve ever been injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: https://www.forthepeople.com/YouTubeTakeoverHost:Angenette Levy  https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guest: Shanon Gray https://www.facebook.com/GoncalvesFamilyTipsCRIME 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 and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. I think it's reasonable to go ahead and pick the June of 2025 as a trial date. More than 19 months after four University of Idaho students were murdered in their home off campus, a trial date has been set for the man accused of killing them. I outlined the latest details about when Brian Koberger's trial will likely take place and how long it's expected to last, plus what one of the victim's families has to say about it. Thanks for joining me for Crime Fix. I'm Anjanette Levy. It's been nearly two years

since Maddie Mogan, Kaylee Gonsalves, Ethan Chapin, and Zanna Cronodal went to bed early on a Sunday morning after a night out and then were murdered. All four were stabbed to death. The man charged in their murders, Brian Koberger, was taken into custody six weeks later. The victim's families have been waiting for some significant movement in the case. And now, 19 months later, there really hasn't been any. The defense has been asking for evidence that they believe they're entitled to so they can prepare for trial. Judge John Judge has at times seemed frustrated by the seemingly slow pace of

the proceedings. He wants to get the case moving. I think we're about 13 months from the arraignment. And I think at this point, this is my opinion, that we're getting to a point of diminishing returns. But now, all these months later, there is a tentative trial date, June of 2025. We've reviewed the court's proposed scheduling order with the attorney team, and we are agreeable to it. It makes sense that we do the trial in the summertime when high school is out across the street and when the university is out and conflicting activities. And the schedule that Your Honor proposed is acceptable to the state. I would note, just minor detail, that June 19th is also a legal holiday. The court specified July 4th as a legal holiday that we wouldn't be able to hold trial, but June 19th as well. Other than that, we have no objection to the court's proposal.

I mean, as I went through all of this, I mean, there's going to be a lot of motions, a lot of hearings, a lot of work. There already has been a significant amount of work, as we all know. And when I tried to balance this out, I do think it was pretty fair, balanced, and I hope realistic. You're on our first. I know the court has listed this as taking place in Latah County. We haven't been heard on our change of venue yet. That's to come in August. So I just don't want anybody thinking I'm agreeing to Latah County at all. That change of venue motion is being argued at the end of August. The defense wants the

case moved out of Latah County and things have become heated when the issue has come up in the past, specifically over a survey the defense conducted of prospective jurors. I'm sorry, I'm feeling hurt about this issue. I see you were almost breaking down a two minutes. So we were talking about slide number 33, all the slides number 30 blocks. That's not the intent. And it's 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 you're working really hard 15 years to develop a credible reputation and being told, watching on a Zoom, that I am tainting the jury pool and poisoning the jury pool and contaminating the jury pool 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. We didn't violate the non-submissional order. 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 the state and state actors put information into the public record that has now been disseminated. And we have not violated that order. And I do resent being accused of that. That was just a sampling of how heated those proceedings became. That survey has continued, and Taylor appeared to be on board with a June 2, 2025 trial date, but she made it clear that could always change. The June of 2025, that's the time frame that we have been working towards. I am hopeful that we can come in there. We're working towards that date. I think it's reasonable to set that date. As the court's aware, mitigation is something that takes a significant amount of time. We've had that underway since the day we took this case.

We continue to work that very hard. I spoke with our mitigation expert last night about this date, and there's a lot of work yet to be done, but we're still working towards that. So I think I spoke with our mitigation expert last night about this date. And there's a lot of work yet to be done, but we're still working towards that. So I think it's reasonable to set that. I just want the court to know that that's not finished at this point. That's very much ongoing and new things are coming out that we need to follow up. But with that said, I think it's reasonable to go ahead and pick the June of 2025 as a trial date. A change of venue in a high profile case in Idaho wouldn't be unheard of. We've seen venue changes granted in two high profile cases recently, the trials of Lori

Vallow and Chad Daybell. Their trials for the murders of Chad's wife, Tammy Daybell, and Lori's children, Tylee Ryan and JJ Vallow. Both were convicted at separate trials, and Chad Daybell was sentenced to death. Brian Koberger is presumed innocent. A not guilty plea was entered on his behalf, and he has maintained his innocence. He claimed he was out driving and looking at the moon and stars the night of the murder, something his lawyer claims he often does. This is a three-month trial. So I was calculating two weeks to set the jury, then eight weeks of trial, and then two weeks for mitigation and sentencing. And I mean, that's a guess, but I think it's enough time for all of those things to take care of.

And obviously, the last two weeks would only be if Mr. Pofferford was convicted. Law and Crime YouTube Takeover. If you've seen our videos, you know that Morgan & Morgan is a proud sponsor of Law and Crime, and our content proves that unfortunately, the world is not always a safe place. When you're hurt, it can be confusing, it can be really scary, and you don't always know where to turn. Well, Morgan & Morgan, America's largest injury law firm, can help you. They're the largest firm because they win a lot. And I mean a lot. Morgan & Morgan has recently received verdicts of $12.2 million in Florida. They got one for $26.2 million in Philly and one for $6.8 million in New York. All of these, by the way, were significantly higher than the highest insurance company offer. Also, there are zero

upfront fees. You only pay Morgan & Morgan if you win. If you've ever been injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in eight clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit www.forthepeople.com slash YouTube takeover. Since this is a death penalty case, there's an added layer of complexity added to the proceedings. That's why jury selection will take two weeks. If Brian Koberger is convicted, the state will present evidence showing there were aggravating factors that warrant Koberger being sentenced to death. For example, there were multiple victims and the homicides were

especially heinous and cruel. For young people, some of them sleeping were stabbed to death. Ann Taylor indicated she may still need more time to complete her mitigation work. That's the case she would present if Brian Koberger were convicted. It includes researching his background for mitigating factors that a jury would use when weighing the aggravating factors. Recognizing that the trial is the innocence phase and the sentencing phase, if it happens, is the mitigation and aggravation. I would just say this is a fine deadline, but we won't be touching anything to do with our mitigation by then, if that's what the court anticipated. Yes. Okay, perfect. I think we, well, yeah, when we had March 3rd for mitigation, I figured by then he would pretty much have that in hand.

We should. We hope to. Did you catch that? Ann Taylor says she hopes to. Judge Judge reiterated gently, I should say, that he really wants to get this trial going. The more we can resolve certain motions, you know, supplements, whatever we need to do, I'm trying to do this sooner than later. Yes, sir. And that's our preference as well. And Ms. Taylor as well. Yes, sir. Just to make sure, though, I mean, you have to do your job and the state has to do its job and I have to do my job.

But I think this is a great step. And Judge Judge earlier in the hearing said just because there's a deadline set, it doesn't mean that motions can't be submitted early. And by the way, a lot of these deadlines, I mean, you can certainly do them earlier if you'd like to. I would encourage everybody to do that. It sounds like Judge Judge would prefer the attorneys file their motions well before the deadlines. The families of the victims, Maddie, Ethan and Zanna haven't said anything about the pace of the proceedings. But the Gonsalves family has been outspoken and they've been unhappy with how slowly things have appeared to move. No substantive motions have been filed in the case. Everything's been about discovery and the change of venue motion. As I mentioned, that will not be heard until the end of August. But now the Gonsalves seem to be

happy that a trial date has been set. I spoke with their attorney, Shannon Gray, after the hearing. Well, I think the family was really happy today that they got a trial date that was set on this case. And so it's now they have something to look forward to. A lot of the frustration in the past has been, you know, just not having a trial date, not knowing where the case was headed, you know, motion after motion filed delay after delay. And today they got a, they got trial date set. They got a scheduling order that was put out. Um, and you know, within the scheduling order, there was the mention that if the change of venue, which I think that hearing is in August, at the end of August, even if the change of venue was granted, that the judge did not suspect the trial date would change, which is good news for the family. them tremendously because and all of the families i'm sure because they want this to come to some sort of conclusion so they can move on and and really start to grieve because without a trial

without some finality they can't really go through that process so how are they doing christy and steve um as the months wear on you know we see the posts on the Gonsalves Army family Facebook page, and obviously this has taken a toll on them tremendously. Well, you know, it's always a roller coaster ride. It's good days and bad days, right? Good days, you feel, you know, like things are moving forward. Bad days, you just, you know, feel like when is it ever going to end? So, you know, it's an up and down situation. It's always up and down. That's the way their life will be from here moving forward is that, you know, they'll have good days and they'll have bad days. And, but they are

excited that there is a trial date set and they can kind of put things in motion to, you know, to be there and, and, and see justice to be served on this case. I know that they want the trial to be held in Latah County, but we saw the hearing with the jury consultant doing the survey for the defense, and it sounds like he's literally going to tell the judge in that August hearing that Latah County is just not a place that should be under consideration. But now we're we're an additional we're another year out. We're a year out from the tentative trial date that's been set. So that's that's more time, a lot longer period of time for memories in the community to fade. So how are they feeling about that? And are they open to going somewhere else for the trial?

Well, I think the family wants to have the trial in Latah County. That's where the incident occurred. You know, change of venues aren't something that are new in the criminal world. They're filed all the time in different cases, especially high profile cases. So it's not uncommon for a change of venue. I think it's something that we have, you know, we I think anybody could have told you from day one that the defense on this case was going to file a change of venue motion. It's a smaller county, but they still have a lot of towns and surrounding areas. You still only have to pick a jury of 12 you know and so um i think that they're confident

that it'll stay in latah county um and it won't be moved so oh interesting so they feel comfortable and confident that it will stay in latah county i don't know why it wouldn't to tell you the truth i think the family feels that you know latah County is where the incident occurred and that, and there are enough jurors to pick a fair and impartial jury. I mean, what's the purpose of the non-dissemination order if not to secure a jury pool? You know, you don't get the best of both worlds. Have a non-dissemination order that's been lasting the entire court case with no one really being able to speak about the case or anything about the case and then, you know, claim that there's not a jury pool that's available. So I think that they feel that that's their that the trial will stay

in Latah County. During a prior hearing, an expert for the defense said his research showed that Latah County was biased against Brian Koberger. Because we asked these questions, what we found is that, like I said, very high recognition rates. So 79 percent of respondents knew at least five of these items. The idea that we're undermining his due process rights. Everybody knows all this stuff. 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. Dr. Brian Edelman is expected to recommend against holding the trial in Latah County. The state, of course, will have an opportunity to cross-examine him on his findings, and that decision will be made by Judge Judge. When you lived in Moscow, did you hear people talking about this case a lot when you were out and about? Not really. I mean, it's a small town. There's lots of things to do in Moscow as far as just their daily lives. People go about their daily lives and do the things they need to do. When there's a hearing, you know, there's a lot of people in town. You know, there's a lot of people, businesses benefit from the people being in town, hotels benefit from people coming in town

for the hearings and things like that. But people aren't just walking around talking about this case. You know, I think Moscow itself probably wants this case to disappear as fast as possible. University of Idaho for sure wants it to disappear. You know, so, you know, I think that it's not something that when you're walking around that you hear on the streets. Interesting. So the family is feeling, I guess, good about things now moving forward. There are there are deadlines.

Those deadlines could always change. But the judge has made it pretty clear that he wants to get this moving and he wants to see this go forward. Yeah, I think you can only delay so much. And then you got to get the, you know, you can put the rubber to the road and get going on things. And I think he's reached that point where he feels like, you know, with the scheduling order saying that whether a change of venue is allowed or not, he still feels that that's the trial date. And so I thought it was important that he put that in his order. How do they feel about how the court is handling everything? I know there's an emotional component here because this is somebody accused of killing their daughter.

But at the same time, he has to be able to prepare his defense and be represented well under the circumstances. So do they see that need, even though I'm sure they've been frustrated? I know they've been frustrated at points. Yeah, I mean, they've been frustrated throughout the process. You know, you always want the case to get to trial tomorrow or yesterday, right? And so, but, you know, they understand the delays. They understand some of the delays. They understand some of the delays, you know, but the judicial process, they know that he has to prepare defense. They know that the prosecution has the things that they need to do. And and they understand that. But they also understand that the other there needs to be a trial date. And there was one put in place today and they're happy about that. So. 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.