Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Idaho Murders House Set to Be Demolished in 2 Weeks, Victims' Families Furious

Episode Date: December 15, 2023

The University of Idaho announced the house where four students were murdered more than a year ago will be demolished on December 28. At least two of the families of the victims had opposed demolishing the house before the trial of Bryan Kohberger, 29. The Law&Crime Network's Angenette Levy talks with retired FBI agent and attorney Bobby Chacon about the plan to raze the house and what it could mean for the trial in this episode of Crime Fix - a daily show that delves into the biggest stories in the world of crime.See 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. The house where four University of Idaho students were murdered will be torn down after all by the end of the year. It's something at least two of the victim's families fought. I knew in my heart what was best for those girls and that and Ethan, I knew what was best was to keep that around until they did more. But the school now says the house is coming down. I'm Anjanette Levy. It's Friday and this is Crime Fix, law and crimes look at the biggest stories in crime. It's been more than a year since Maddie

Mogan, Kelly Gonsalves, Zanna Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin were murdered at the house on King Road. Police held the scene for weeks, often going back to the house to look at things or collect more evidence. Following the arrest of Brian Koberger for their murders, the owners of the King Road house gave the property to the university, which is totally understandable. A horrific crime occurred there. Asbestos and other biohazards were discovered inside. Who would want to live there? The school wants to tear down the house, but Kaylee Gonsalves' family specifically wanted the house to stay around until after the trial. I broke the story of the family wanting the house to remain standing last June.

Here's the Gonsalves family attorney, Shannon Gray. Big piece of evidence that potentially a jury might want to see it. I mean, there's sights and sounds and viewpoints and angles. It's an odd shaped house where witnesses were standing, where potentially the defendant was standing. Locations, how you could hear something, how you might not, how you couldn't hear it, if there was video or any other evidence outside, what was the vantage point of those videos, if they picked up audio or anything. So a lot of things I think are important about that home. And we've just stressed, just hold on. Wait till the trial is over and then

do whatever you want with the property. Now, after the outcry from the Gonsalves and Cronutal families, the university then changed course and halted plans for a possible October demolition. Then soon after Koberger, who maintains his innocence, waived his right to a speedy trial, prosecutors and the FBI actually went back to the house on King Road. At the time, the university said they were there to take measurements for audio and other trial exhibits that would be constructed. That wouldn't have been possible before with the tight time frame of a speedy trial. Now the university has announced that Koberger's defense team was also being given access to the house

so they could do their own work there, including taking measurements and getting some drone footage. The house will be torn down on December 28th, two days before the one-year mark of Koberger's arrest. The president of the university issued the following statement. It is the grim reminder

of the heinous act that took place there. While we appreciate the emotional connection some family members of the victims may have to this house, it is time for its removal and to allow the collective healing of our community to continue. So there you have it. The president of the university says the house is going to be torn down. And it sounds like the defense and the prosecution are totally on board with this. And somebody who would know about how important this is and what it means and whether or not it's the right decision is Bobby Chacon. He's a retired FBI agent and an attorney. And he and I have discussed this whole thing in the past, and we'll have more on

that coming up on Law and Crime another time. But right now, we're talking about it here on Crime Fix. Bobby, thank you so much for coming on. I appreciate it. Sure, thanks for having me. The FBI, they went back there last month, I guess, and took some measurements and did some things at the house to prepare it for trial. Now the university says, we're tearing it down. So what are your thoughts on, first of all, the university saying, indeed, we are going to tear this house down on December 28th?

Well, I know the reaction that most of the public is kind of feeling like, no, no, no, don't do that. Until we get a conviction, we can't like, you know, anything that's even possibly relevant to this case shouldn't be destroyed and things like that. But I can tell you, I was part of a forensic team on the FBI for 19 years, and they've gotten all the evidentiary value out of that house that they're going to get.

They've got all the forensic value out of that house that they're going to get. There's not much more they can get. And I know there are some trials that allow the jury to go to the location. I've never been a big fan of that. I think that can be misleading. I think that in the courtroom is where you get the best evidence presented to you. I just got off a case where I was a juror for five months on a case where murder happened in a house. And we had both county and state forensics teams do examinations in that house. They provided us with sketches, with photographs, with video, and then the results, obviously, of their forensic examinations. And they walked us through the crime scene. Our case, the murder happened in the kitchen, and then there was blood in the laundry room. It all matched up with witness statements and other things. And so I think that the value that that

house holds has been sufficiently obtained by the prosecution, or as you stated, in this case, the prosecution wouldn't agree. If the prosecution thought they needed that to make this case, they would fight that destruction. They could try to get some kind of TRO, some kind of injunctive relief to stop the university from doing that. But the prosecution realizes that they've obtained all the forensic and the other, even the eyewitness probably did a walkthrough of it. You know, the one eyewitness of roommates that they have, I'm sure they did walkthroughs with the police. And so I think they've gotten everything they need out of that house personally. So just to be clear with our viewers and our listeners, when they take the jury on a field trip, if you will, I mean, they don't call it that, light over the summer in which the prosecution and the defense had agreed that the house could go back to the university.

They were like, OK, the university can have the house back. We've done all we need to do there. It sounds like there was like asbestos discovered there. There was also, you know, a lot of chemicals apparently were used to process the scene. So this is a highly contaminated environment and they didn't feel like it was necessary to take jurors in there because you can do what's called these pharaoh scans. You know, I've seen that in some trials where they scan the place. It's like this 3D thing. And they can capture all of these images. And then they can do trajectory stuff.

They can do all this really fancy, fancy stuff. They can also design computer animation models. I've seen that in some trials too, where they basically, it's like a virtual tour of a house. And this is a really crazy shaped house with a third floor addition and everything. So that was the objection of the family in one instance. Like one of their attorneys said, this is a really odd shaped house with like these staircases and all these different places. And you might hear one thing in one spot, but not another.

So what is your response to that, Bobby? Well, I think you're right. I mean, back in my day, it was called an icon total station, but it's whatever they're using. They do these laser generated, computer generated models. People have seen this in CAD and in architectural drawings. If you look on some of the real estate websites that you can do house tours through and stuff. And so the computer software is very sophisticated nowadays. You can almost remodel anything onto a computer that you can show existed in real life. Like I said, I don't think there's a great benefit. I don't think there's pretty much any benefit of keeping that house. I don't think they planned on doing a jury view of the house. And that's done in not in every trial, certainly.

And there's different criteria in different states and different judges use different criteria for when it that that's going to be a great benefit to a jury in the future um or else they wouldn't agree to have the house uh allow the university to destroy the house i remember the university owns the house i mean it's it's it's it's property of someone else something tragic and something horrible and evil happened there um but it actually is the property of someone else and so they can do with it what they wish in the long term. And that's after the government and the prosecution and the police have gained every piece of value of that property. And in this case, I'm confident in the prosecution position that they have. They've gotten everything. The FBI went in there just more recently anyway,

with a team that I think did exactly what you alluded to. They did a computer scan, a laser scan of every inch of that house, of every little nook and cranny of the house, and those kind of things and stuff. And so I don't see it as a huge detriment to the successful prosecution in this case. It'll be really interesting to see those exhibits when they are finished. I mean, it's amazing what can be done these days and what can be done with audio enhancements. I mean, there are recordings too from ring door cameras that are referenced in the probable cause affidavit talking about hearing a thud and like a yelp and screaming and a dog barking. I mean, we may know exactly when somebody passed away and was

murdered in this case due to that type of evidence. The defense is going in there today, Bobby, and they were allowed in there yesterday as well. So the defense is being given access to prepare their case. They're doing their own measurements and getting some drone footage and things of that nature, right? I mean, I don't understand where they're going with that. But obviously, they're probably going to want their own experts to refute or do whatever with whatever the state is producing with the FBI. So, I mean, what do you think is like happening here as far as the defense perspective goes? I i mean they're going to go in there and take their own measurements i mean measurements are measurements i mean i you know i

i'm thinking of a measuring tape you know like a measuring tape's an inch is an inch i mean they could conceivably they could have their own expert do a video walkthrough and say you know based on the sounds and they probably did a timeline based on the affidavits and everything else that's come out in court of all the sounds that you just said were heard here and there. And they could do a video walkthrough by one of their experts and say, look, he couldn't possibly have been here and there and there. And so the government's timeline, the prosecution's timeline is it couldn't have happened because our expert, and you can see our expert walk through this house on video, and we're going to simulate the sound here and that other sound there and where the prosecution says the defendant was here and there. And so they could do a video walkthrough or something like that, a demonstration that they could make a motion to play for the jury later on. So they could be doing something like that,

but it's beyond just simple measurements because they probably have the measurements that were taken numerous times. And in discovery, they'll get, if they haven't already, all the results of the FBI's exams and the FBI forensic stuff. So my guess is they've got all that. That's fine.

But they're probably going to want their own expert to do a simulated walkthrough. They probably can, by the filings already, figure out what the prosecution might allege with the defendant's movements through the House. And they're going to try to refute that by saying, well, our expert did a walkthrough. And if he made that sound over here, he couldn't have possibly made the other sound over there because it's not enough time to get down this stairway and of course this room. So they're doing, I would imagine the defense is doing things like that, that they're going to do like some kind of demonstration on video that's going to then be played for the jury. And finally, Bobby, you know, this is a house that was a happy place for so many years, at least for the couple of years that those kids lived there. And it's now become just this kind of grim, macabre symbol of something so awful. And I'm sure there are people with not the best of intentions who go by there. There are people, they've had it under guard. I

mean, even the university has had it under guard since they took possession of it. Do you think maybe that's the best thing to do is to tear it down and move forward just because, I mean, I'm sure the university wants it off, you know, they want it gone for certain reasons. I'm sure they have their own motivations, but also this thing could be like some crazy tourist attraction for people who just don't have the best of intentions. Do you think it's the best thing? Do you think this is the best thing to do is just to get rid of it? I personally do. And we've seen this in past cases. I mean, I think OJ Simpson's house was knocked down, even though that wasn't the site of the crime. I mean, it was the site where he may have tracked blood from the crime scene, allegedly. You know, so, I mean, we've had cases where, you know, these horrific crime scenes have been either destroyed or significantly remodeled so that you don't have those macabre gawkers come by.

I mean, you could have like a tour. Somebody could, you know, famous murder sites of Los Angeles, get in this bus and we're going to drive you by all these, you know, evil places that evil happened and stuff. And there are people that do that and it's unfortunate. And I think the university probably wants to head off something like that. I think it's appropriate, you know, probably to put a memorial in that space. But the house itself, it just has a feeling of the macabre and evil. And I think that it's more appropriate to kind of, in my mind, and this is just my personal opinion, to knock it down and put up some kind of nice memorial to the victims where people can go and spend time in that place

and remember who these good people were and the bad thing that happened to them. So I don't think the house itself needs to be there as a reminder of the evil. I think it's better probably to have some kind of memorial and hopefully the university will consider doing that. I don't know if they've mentioned that at all, but I would think that that would be, you know, much more appropriate.

But we've seen this in previous cases where houses or places like that have either been destroyed or significantly altered so that it doesn't look or feel like that anymore. Yeah, they haven't announced any specific plans for it. But the only plans we know right now are that December 28th, it's coming down. And we will, of course, have that covered for you here on Law and Crime. I do want to mention there's not yet been a trial date set for Brian Koberger at this point. He remains behind bars. He faces the possibility of the death penalty if he's convicted. And right now, this thing's moving toward trial whenever that may be.

So, Bobby Chacon, thanks again for coming on Crime Fix. We appreciate it. Anytime. Thanks for having me. That's it for Crime Fix on this Friday, December 15th, 2023. I'm Anjanette Levy. Have a great weekend. I will see you back here on Monday.