Crime Stories with Nancy Grace - IDAHO STUDENTS SLAY: SICK GHOULS EYE DEMOLISHED HOUSE FOR "SOUVENIRS?"

Episode Date: January 10, 2024

As Bryan Kohberger’s defense team tries again to get a judge to toss out the indictment against Kohberger, the home where the four murders took place is now gone. The clapboard house located at 1122 King Road, Moscow has been torn down, with the entire front of the building razed from sight in roughly 15 minutes. According to school officials, demolition was set for during the school's winter break, when fewer students would be in the area. It took just 90 minutes in total, for the home to become a pile of rubble. The debris, loaded up by two contractors, was taken to a secret area for disposal. The site was combed for not a single item to be left behind for the curious to find and keep as a macabre souvenir. One local who wished to remain anonymous said 'They want nothing left for ghouls to plunder.' Some, however, are still concerned that the best evidence in this case is now gone.  The home was scanned using 3D imaging to allow the jury to be brought into the home and take a virtual tour where they wouldn't have been able to go. The families of the four students killed in the house on King Road were not in agreement on the demolition. The Goncalves and Kernodle families issued a statement before the demolition, asking the university to wait to tear the building down until Kohberger's trial is completed. The Goncalves' family said through their attorney, that the house “has evidentiary and emotional value." In the statement, Goncalves wrote, "The family has stressed tirelessly to the Prosecution and the University of Idaho the importance (evidentiary and emotionally) that the King Road house carries but nobody seems to care enough." She adds that the “families' opinion isn't a priority.” The family of Ethan Chapin, who did not live there, offered its support for the demolition. In their statement, the Chapins said the demolition was needed  "for the good of the University, its students (including our own kids), and the community of Moscow." Joining Nancy Grace Today: Dale Carson – High-profile Attorney (Jacksonville), Former FBI Agent & Former Police Officer (Miami-Dade County); Author: “Arrest-Proof Yourself” Dr. Bethany Marshall – Psychoanalyst (Beverly Hills); Twitter: @DrBethanyLive/ Instagram & TikTok: drbethanymarshall; Appearing in the new show, “Paris in Love” on Peacock Chris McDonough – Director At the Cold Case Foundation, Former Homicide Detective; Host of YouTube channel: “The Interview Room” Dr. Cyril Wecht - Forensic Pathologist, Medical-legal consultant, Author of many books including “The Life and Deaths of Cyril Wecht: Memoirs of America’s Most Controversial Forensic Pathologist”  Andy Kahan - Director of Victim Services and Advocacy at Crime Stoppers of Houston Rachel Schilke- Breaking News Reporter for The Washington Examiner; Twitter: @rachel_schilke See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. In the last hours, the crime scene in Idaho, in Moscow, where four beautiful students were literally slaughtered, most likely in their sleep, has been destroyed. That's right, totally demolished. Or was it? Is there any speck left behind for scavengers seeking murderabilia. Is there anything left for them? And why? Why would they do that?

This, as the defendant, suspect number one in the quadruple slay Brian Koberger, makes a last-ditch effort to the judge to have the case thrown out of court. I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. Thank you for being with us here at Crime Stories and on Sirius XM 111. First of all, take a listen to this. It took just 90 minutes time for the infamous home at 1122 King Road to become nothing more than a pile of rubble. The debris, loaded up by two contractors, taken to a secret area for disposal. The site was combed for not a single item to be left behind for the curious to find and keep as a souvenir. One local who wished to remain anonymous said they wanted nothing left for the ghouls to plunder. Well, I hope that everything

you just heard from our friends at CrimeOnline.com is true. Joining me in all star panel to make sense of what we know right now. Joining me in addition to the other stars on the panel, Andy Kahn, Director of Victim Services and Advocacy, Crime Stoppers Houston, who first coined the phrase murderabilia, and Harold Schechter, author of Murderabilia, A History of Crime in 100 Objects. You know, a lot of people would not be interested in that. I, however, am extremely interested in that. Think about it. A History of Crime in 100 Objects. What objects and why? He is also the author of Maniac, the Bath School Disaster and the Birth of Modern Mass Murder. Again, that's certainly not everyone's cup of tea. However, it is my cup of tea. You can find him at HaroldScheckter.com. So let's start with them. Then I'll circle back to breaking news reporter with the Washington Examiner Rachel Schilke who can tell you everything you want to know about why the crime scene has been destroyed but first Andy Cahan joining us Andy thank you for being with us you

and Harold both Andy explain what is murderabilia and as far as I know you coined that phrase and you greatly helped me and inspired me and my first nonfiction book, Objection, where there is an entire chapter devoted to what I learned from you called Blood Money. Explain. is items that are associated with serial killers, mass murderers, school shooters, high-profile killers that are then peddled on an open market, primarily the Internet. So these are items that are produced personally by some of the nation's worst serial killers and mass murderers. Let me just break it down, because when I was in your office there in Victims Advocacy in Texas, I believe you showed me somebody's toenails. Did you show me somebody's toenails or their hair? What was it you showed me that was not the most disgusting thing I've

ever seen, but it definitely was in the top 10. What was it you showed me, Andy Cajon? Inside my duffel bag in my office, I actually have murderabilia items that include serial killer hair samples, which is like Charles Manson's hair that was sold in the form of a swastika. I have actual fingernail clippings from a California serial killer. I have pieces of clothing. I have objects that were actually taken from crime scenes itself. What kind of objects taken from crime scenes? Because that's what I'm worried about with the demolition of the King Road address.

What objects have been taken from a crime scene? Look, anything is fair game. If some ghoul gets, I don't know, a piece of wood, a piece of cement, a piece of fabric, a piece of furniture. Let me give you an example, Nancy. Hit me. John Wayne Gacy's crawl space. 40 people that were bidding for items from for dirt that was scooped up and put into a plastic bag where Gacy had buried over 30 young men. Okay, stop right there. Dirt, dirt from Gacy's wall crawl space beneath his home. The clown killer, he would lure, molest, and murder little boys and then bury the bodies in his crawl space. People actually paid money for the dirt. How much money?

Well, they were paying anywhere from $50 to $100 for little bags of dirt. Let's go to Harold Schechter joining us, author of Murderabilia, A History of Crime in 100 Objects. Harold, what is wrong with these people? They're ghouls. They're like vampires sucking the marrow out of a crime scene. What is wrong with these people? Well, I think it's important to put the phenomenon in some kind of historical context. You know, the only thing different now about collecting murderabilia is, as Andy says, you can do it

on the internet. But the fact remains, if you look at the history of crime, people have always wanted to own souvenirs connected to very gruesome and sensational crimes. Why do you say that, Harold Schechter? What's the oldest example of murderabilia that you know of? Well, you know, back in the, let's say, 1700s, when a condemned murderer was hanged, one of the perks for the executioner was that he could keep the noose. And the executioners would cut the nooses into one-inch pieces and sell them to these morbid souvenir hunters. You know, one of the interesting things, I'm a historian of true crime. You know, my books examine crimes going back to Shakespeare's time. And every time there has been a very notorious murder, people have flocked to the site of the murder and often torn down, you know, the barns or the houses where these crimes have taken place. I'll give you an example. In the 1870s, I'm sure you've heard of the Bender family. The Bender family was this family who opened a roadside tavern in Kansas in the early 1870s.

And when travelers, you know, weary travelers would stay there, the benders would murder them and take all their possessions and bury their corpses in the apple orchard. When their crimes were discovered, hundreds and hundreds of people descended on the bender property and basically tore down the house, you know, coming away with these souvenirs. It's not a new phenomenon. No, it's really not. You're right to bring up the Bender family. Guys, this is happening now.

And I'm going to go to our legal expert to discuss what does this mean legally, if and when this case ever goes to trial, that there was no more crime scene to visit. But first, I want you to take a listen to our friends at Crime Online. The Clatboard House, located at 1122 King Road, has been torn down with the entire front of the building out of sight in roughly 15 minutes. According to school officials, demolition was set for during the school's winter break when fewer students would be in the area. The home, however, has been digitized into a 3D model using the latest technology, and according to the prosecution and defense,

the actual building will serve no purpose in the upcoming trial. So with all legal sides in agreement, the home that was donated by its owner to the University of Idaho has been razed. Interesting that we hear from Crime Online and the legal parties that they're fine with the destruction of the home. But in my mind, those most connected to this case disagree. Take a listen to our cut 7-11 from Crime Stories. The families of the four students killed in the house on King Road were not in agreement on the demolition. The Gonzávez and Cronodal

families issued a statement before the demolition asking the university to wait to tear down the building until Koberger's trial is completed. The Gonzávez family released a statement through their attorney saying the house has evidentiary and emotional value. In the statement, González wrote, quote, The family has stressed tirelessly to the prosecution and the University of Idaho the importance, evidentiary and emotionally, that the King Road house carries, but nobody seems to care enough. She writes, The family's opinion isn't a priority. The family of Ethan Chapin, who did not live there, offered its support of the demolition. In their statement, the Chapin said the demolition was needed, quote, for the good of

the university, its students, including our kids, and the community of Moscow. This is what I think about that. I think that there's a very strong possibility the jury would not have seen the crime scene. Seeing the crime scene is very rare. We only hear about it in high profile cases when it does happen. Typically, it does not happen. However, better safe than sorry. I think rushing into the demolition of the quadruple homicide was wrong at this juncture. That said, I want to hear about this so-called secret location and I want to hear about the destruction of the home.

We'll circle back to the ghouls that are absolutely trying to get memorabilia from the King Road home. No question about that. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Joining me, Rachel Schilke, along with the rest of our experts, breaking news reporter, Washington Examiner. Rachel, thank you for being with us. Tell me about the destruction of the crime scene.

Well, the house was originally supposed to be demolished in August, but they delayed it because they were going through this court process of deciding whether or not they were going to keep the home standing or not. And then eventually the home was destroyed over the students' winter break. The university officials wanted to minimize any emotional damage that it could do on the students. And as we heard in those clips, a lot of the family members were not OK with this. They said that there could be evidentiary value, that this could be very important if there was a jury that could eventually see the home, or at least just to have it there in case the evidence needed to be put forward in court.

So definitely was not the majority opinion of most of the people involved. Where is the so-called secret location where the timbers and the scaffold, everything went? Where is the secret location? No, I'm actually not sure where that secret location is. Well, it won't take long to find out. Joining me again, high profile experts on the case, Chris McDonough joining me, who has visited the scene many, many times, director of the Cold Case Foundation, former homicide detective, over 300 homicides under his belt, and host of a YouTube channel where I found him, The Interview Room. Chris McDonough, what do you think?

As a homicide detective, what do you think? Angie, I think in one of these cases, in a case like this, this is a huge mistake. This is just my personal opinion is the fact that that building is now gone, I think the biggest problem the state's going to have, the 3D digital and all of the other forensic stuff that they've collected, that's not an issue. But the acoustics of that home are going to play very important roles. And the reason for that is within 50 feet of that house, there's a video camera that allegedly picked up moaning or something to that effect,

and it's in the affidavit. Now, if they didn't have an acoustic engineer go in there and measure, then they've got a real problem. And the other problem I see is early on with the university, it sounded like was pushing this destruction of this house. They said that both the defense and the prosecution had signed off. That's not a problem. They stipulated to that, this is your lane. You know more than anybody on this channel about, you know, what we're talking about there. However, in this particular case, the FBI returns later on after the civilian company that was in there to clean the house up. The FBI returns to take digital, you know, a digital footprint. So if I was a defense, immediately I would file motions that that is, you know, tainted evidence that they collected

because there's video of this company, the company that was going to tear it down, walking in and out of that house multiple times. And now the FBI shows up just before it's going to be torn down and they decide to collect additional evidence. After it's been cleaned, right, Chris McDonough? Absolutely. And so what evidence, that evidence will never come in, right, Nancy? I mean, you would fight forever if you were the defense attorney to keep that evidence.

If I were the prosecutor, I would not have want it torn down. Absolutely. Chris McDonough, absolutely not yet. Maybe one day, of course, but not yet. I don't know why we could not wait till after the trial. Now joining me, high profile lawyer out of the Jacksonville jurisdiction, former FBI agent, former cop, Miami Dade, never a lack of business there and author of Arrest Proof Yourself. You can find him at DaleCarsonLaw.com. Dale, I got a lot of problems with tearing down the house, and I want to go back to our murderabilia experts, Andy Cahan and Harold Schechter, but Dale Carson, this doesn't mean a hill of beans when we hear both sides agree. Okay, why? Because if it's a mistake that they got rid of the house, the defense can use that later. If there is a conviction, there can be a claim on appeal of ineffective assistance of counsel

by that defense lawyer agreeing to the demolition. I mean, is nobody thinking the A word? Appeal. You don't want to win the case for it to be reversed on appeal. You don't want to win the case for it to be reversed on appeal. I just think that we made a mad dash to tear the house down. And for what? Right. There's no process in tearing it down. I've been to thousands of crime scenes over my life, and I can simply tell you that the destruction of the primary piece of evidence is insane. That house gives you perspective. It gives you a great many other

vantage points. Odell, just right there. After I watched Chris McDonough do his drive-through all over the town, all up, they're very narrow roads. They're streets, very narrow streets. I don't really know that two cars can pass each other especially in that weather when it's uh snowing and the roads are icy and the hill that the house is up on a hill what I'm saying is the layout of the home and seeing the home as you're just saying is so much different than a picture. So when I saw Chris McDonough driving through, taking a video at about literally two miles an hour, maybe I knew I had to go if I were going to talk about this case knowledgeably.

And when I got there, as you're saying, Dale Carson, it's so much different than the photos depict. When I went up that hill and went around the house to the back of the house, it's three stories, perched up there, I can just see Coburger right now. I can just see him up there in the dark looking down into that home. I mean, you could throw a softball to it from the vantage point. There was only a thin line of trees between the house and where I was parked. I went there in the morning. I went there in the afternoon. I went there in the evening and I went there in the dead of night after midnight to look down at the house because somebody left a light on there. Light on in there, Dale Dale Carson completely different than it looks in the pictures Dale and of course you

can see directly in where the women would be during their their living there Dale I can even look into the home across the street and tell you the name of the dishwashing liquid sitting at the kitchen counter. That's incredible. That's how easy, how tight the space is. So what you're saying about a picture cannot explain it fully. No, and that's powerful for a jury. It's probably better for the defense that it is gone from that perspective. Oh, yeah. Was that you, Chris McDonough, jumping in?

So to your point, Nancy, the other thing that I think is being overlooked here is the fact that one of the search warrants we forget was to a company called Extreme Networks. There was a search warrant filed on January 25th, 23. And in that, they're looking for intrusion, network intrusion into that residence. There was a, the one of the affiants there is a detective by the name of Neil Errig. He now works for the Secret Service and his expertise is network intrusion. Well, whose laptop are they looking for? If we read that search warrant, it says description or decrypted access to the following computer. Extreme Network Service Tags, Kaley.

They're looking for network intrusion into Kaley's computer. Can you, A, please stop talking like that, network intrusion. Are you saying somebody was trying to hack Kelly Gonsalves' computer? Is that what you're saying? Yes, and I would submit to you, whoever, if it's BK, he's sitting in the back of that house, to your point, looking through those windows and tapping into the network in that home. Once again, you totally freaked me out, Chris McDonough. Dr. Cyril Wecht joining us, renowned forensic pathologist, medical legal consultant, author of so many books,

including The Life and Deaths of Cyril Wecht, Memoirs of America's Most Controversial Forensic Pathologist. I would be inclined to agree with that. Dr. Wecht, thank you for being with us. You've seen so many, many crime scenes and performed so many, many autopsies. What evidence, Dr. Wecht, could have been left behind? In the case of John F. Kennedy, all the statements that your guests have made are extremely applicable and extremely relevant. They're talking about taking down

the Texas School Book Depository building and even maybe reconstructing the Grassy Knoll area where the most critics believe additional struts were fired. So I strongly believe, and without repeating everything that the gentleman and lady have made, are extremely important. I concur fully and strongly agree that there is no need, no rush, no purpose in tearing down the critical physical sites associated with those particular murders. I agree with you, Dr. Wecht. And for all I know, the jury may not be allowed to visit. They may not even want to visit which I doubt. I'm sure they'll want to visit it but now that opportunity is forever gone. It cannot be something up to you can't put it back together again. Why they did it I don't know. I'm not saying never do it.

I'm not saying don't do it before the trial. Back to Harold Schechter and Andy Kahn. And then we're going to a highly recognized psychoanalyst joining us out of Beverly Hills, Dr. Bethany Marshall. Back to you, Andy Kahn. I understand. And correct me if I'm wrong, Rachel Schilke, I understand that all of the lumber, all of the foundation, everything, the bookshelves, the whatever, the kitchen, the bathroom articles, everything was raised early in the morning by 8 a.m. under the cover of darkness. The Clapboard House at 1122 King Road in Moscow was gone after just 90 minutes.

I understand that everything was taken. Rachel Schilke, is this correct? And buried in an undisclosed location. Is that true, Rachel? That's what a lot of the reports are saying. It obviously has not been officially confirmed, but it is possible that all of those materials are still with us. We just are not sure where they are at this moment.

Andy Cajon, it's your experience that these ghouls, they're akin to grave robbers. They'll stop at nothing to get a piece of this house. No, and there's actually precedent for this. But the key distinguishing piece on the two other homes that were raised in Ohio, one which was Ariel Castro, that you might remember was the one that kidnapped and sexually tortured three young women for over a decade and kept them in his house. Part of his plea deal was, again, after he was convicted, that his house would be raz raised and torn down so that nobody could get a quote, a piece of a prize that could be sold.

Ohio did the same thing with Anthony soul, a serial killer that murdered 11 women at that time. After he was convicted keyword after convicted, they raised his house again. So I get why they would want to do this. But I agree with you and some of your other panelists that there is no real sense of urgency right now. But trust me, this is just going to be the beginning and the merchandising of Brian Koberger, because when he actually does get convicted and gets in the Idaho penitentiary, the murderability dealers are going to come after him in droves because he's a treasure trove of profiting for them.

Nancy, if I could interrupt just for a second about a very good reason to keep the house instead of having torn it down. Sure. You know, there's nothing like walking into a space and feeling what happened there. It's like history. It's one thing to like a thumb through a book and look at wars and, you know, young people that were killed in wars. It's another thing to stand on a hilli-knoll or a war field and say young people died here. Harold Schechter joining us, author of Murderabilia, A History of Crime in 100 Objects. Harold Schechter, what do you believe that these ghouls would try to get from the home?

Well, I mean, you know, any little object connected with it immediately achieves, again, this kind of ghoulish value for murderabilia collectors. You know, in the past, I wrote a book, for example, about a mass murderer named Anton Probst back in the 1860s, who butchered an entire family. He lured each member one by one into the barn, and then slaughtered them with an axe. And again, when those crimes were uncovered, and these hordes of people descended on the site, they ripped up the floorboards of the barn. And the ones that, you know, the pieces that had particular value to them were ones that had bloodstains on them. So, again, that illustrates two things. One, you know, this is not something new. I think one of the important things that it's important to consider is why we are so drawn to and fascinated, you know, by these lurid, sensational, horrific crimes to begin with. Harold Schechter, I've wondered that for many, many years. I don't know the answer to that. And I'm just a JD. Okay. We need to shrink. You're right, Schechter.

Let's go straight to Dr. Bethany Marshall, a renowned psychoanalyst joining us out of the Beverly Hills jurisdiction. Bethany, what is wrong with these people? Did you hear what Schechter said? And I want to hear from Andy Kahn Khan as well the floorboard would have more value and I actually feel like I'm eating a dirt sandwich right now I want to just clean my tongue off the floorboard would have more value if there was blood on it Sidney please give me the tea I think I need something a little stronger than tea right now. But how could that be? Thank you. It's got more value in these victims' blood.

You know what? I just had a flashback. My flashback is this, Dr. Bethany. When I had to testify at my fiancee case murder trial, I remember coming down. The witness seat was high up. I had to go up two flights of stairs to get to it. It was equal to the judge up on his bench. And when I came down, I passed the state's table and Keith's bloody denim shirt was there. I'm just trying to get my head wrapped around who would want to buy a bloody floorboard and what Schechter or Harold Schechter told me. And I'm pretty sure Andy Kahn

is going to agree that that floorboard or that mattress or that bed sheet would fetch more money on the internet if the victim's blood was on it? Who are these people? You know, Nancy, I have to believe that these collectors of this murderabilia, present panel excluded, of course, are taking some secret delight in the pain and suffering of the victims. Just like a murderer or a sadist takes delight in the suffering of the victims, just like a murderer or a sadist takes delight in the suffering of the victims, so do these collectors. You know, Nancy, people feel that

just because somebody is famous, they must be fascinating. So like a BTK killer or a Casey Anthony, just because we know a lot about them and they are talked about on the air, ooh, these people must be fascinating. I want a piece of them. But the fact is, criminals, murderers, perpetrators, they are incredibly boring people. Have you ever sat and interviewed one? I'm sure you have. You know, the crimes may be very notorious and sort of

horrible and hard to wrap one's mind around. But when you sit with a criminal, their excitement is not in the conversation with you or about their travels or their children or the latest book they've read. They're so preoccupied with their internal sexualized, fetishized world of wanting to kill people that they're not even present in the room with you. So I think the public should not confuse these criminals and their acts as being fascinating in any way. And the fact is, when you have a floorboard with blood on it in your home, you yourself become proxy to the crime. I know that's a dramatic statement, not in reality. It's not like you could be prosecuted for it. But you are delighting in the anguish of the victim.

You are ignoring what their families have gone through. And you have a whole imagination about what happened that has nothing to do with reality. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Andy Kahn, you had to buy your toenail and hair stash. Can't believe I went to law school three years at Mercer University, and it took me two years at NYU to get an LLM in criminal and constitutional law, and I'm saying your toenail stash. I never thought those words would come out of my mouth, but they did. You had to get it from somewhere.

What freaks are dealing in a killer's toenails? And I agree and disagree with Dr. Bethany Marshall. I think some people want a piece of these victims. They want the bloody bedsheets. They want the bloody floorboard. And can you imagine the pain, Andy Kahn, of the victim's families? I mean, I'm sitting here right now wondering for the first time, because I really don't like to think about it and I try to avoid thinking about it. What happened to Keith's bloody shirt? Where is it? Did they destroy it? Is it in a plastic bag somewhere in an evidence room?

I mean, can you imagine? And Andy, do you really think these ghouls are going to give up? They're going to find where the home remains were buried. They're going to find it and they're going to try and get it. But back to my original question, who are these people? You had to buy those toenails somewhere from who? You know, from a victim's perspective, and it's someone who's worked with homicide survivors for over 30 years, there's absolutely nothing more nauseating and disgusting when you find out the person who murdered one of your loved ones now has items being hawked by third-party dealers simply for pure profit.

Like it or not, you have small groups of people out here, for whatever reason, idolized serial killers, mass murderers, high-profile killers, and they want to own a piece of their soul. And this is a untapped market that they've realized that not only can they own a piece of whatever they have, they can also make money off of it. So you have about seven dealers throughout the country that specialize in obtaining items from high profile killers strictly for the purpose of profiting and anything that you can get that has something associated with the victim because i have actually seen items that were actually used to kill their victims being sold at an open market that is like the ultimate get it's like a treasure hunt and nothing is going to stop them from trying to obtain items from the Idaho killer. Stop, please. I've got to go to Dale Carson on

something. Dale, do you ever, I mean, you and I have tried a lot of cases. Everybody on this panel has dealt with a lot of similar cases. Well, not similar to Idaho, because that's quadruple murder, but murder cases. Dale, do you ever just get sick to your stomach? Because everything Andy Kahn just said, Harold Schechter, Dr. Cyril Wecht, everything they said is correct. But something about, hey, what about this? Do you remember in the Bible how the Roman soldiers gambled to try to get Christ's robe and his crown of thorns, all that was left, and took it somewhere. I mean, as far as I can, I mean, thinking all the way back in history,

how callous and awful that is, Dale, just thinking of someone trying to get remnants of this home. And the more gory and the closer that remnant was to one of the victims, the more valuable it would be. Do you ever just want to quit, Dale Carson, when you hear things like that? Oh, absolutely. You've missed one

salient point. It's the smell of a recent crime scene. And it's troubling because the lines are lost for basically no reason at all. And yes, all the material wealth that they have gathered all these years is of no meaning at this point. Frightening. Nancy? Is this Harold? Yeah, this is Harold. Can I

just interject for a moment? Please do, yes. I mean, one word that we haven't been using so far in this discussion is evil. And, you know, evil exerts its own very dark fascination. Often in the newspaper articles that I've read, when reporters have seen these crowds of morbid curiosity seekers descend on these places and come away with bloody splinters and so on. They talk about them as relics.

And, you know, there's a kind of, they're almost the flip side, the dark side, the shadow side of saints' relics. You know, saints' relics contain something of the holy and the sacred. A lot of the murderabilia, and again, this is, you know, not that these people are conscious of it, but they're little objects, you know, that, you know, that sort of resonate with the power of evil. And there's something about, you know, there's a dark attraction to that for whatever reason. I mean, our, you know, perhaps this psychoanalyst on our panel, whose name, unfortunately, I forgot. Dr. Bethany Marshall. Hey, let's follow up on what Schechter is saying.

You're hearing Harold Schechter, author of Murderabilia. What about it, Dr. Bethany? Well, I think it is an aspect of evil. I think that because it's not just like othering where you know that somebody suffered, but you're kind of callous to it and you don't really care. This is at a whole other level. This is actually taking delight in somebody's suffering. That's really very different. It's having the bloody shirt or the bloody floorboard and looking at it and saying,

aha, I have something. And you are right. I have something of the victim. I have something of the crime. I'm inserting myself into the notoriety of this case. And I feel important because of it. It's really, you know, in one drop of blood is an entire world of anguish and hurt. The anguish of the families, the anguish of the victim, the anguish of the community, the reverberating effect of the crime. And these people are clutching this one little relic, and they are happy.

How different is that, Nancy, than the perpetrator who acts out? I mean, there's a difference between impulse and action. These people are thinking the perpetrator is doing, but they're thinking the same thing the perpetrator's thinking. They're just not acting out on it. Dr. Cyril Weck joining me, renowned pathologist who has seen so many high-profile autopsies, performed them, and been to so many crime scenes. Dr. Wecht, in your opinion, what could have benefited this jury had they been able to go to the crime scene? I believe it would have been highly relevant for

them to have gone to the crime scene and to have specifically visualized themselves from the 6-4 Southeast Corps window where they claim Oswald did the shooting and then to replace themselves downstairs where the shots were heard and see whether it fits in with the audio and with the video evidence. And also to have gone then to the grassy area a short distance away where they claim where the critics claim there was a second shooter. Extremely important. I think the points that everybody has made are very valuable. There's no reason in the world to destroy a highly relevant crime scene unless it's imperative for purposes of some significant new construction. Dr. Wecht, you are so right because just recently I went back to the site

of the JFK assassination and it was completely different than anything I had ever read about or imagined. The grassy knoll, the book depository, the fence across the knoll, the bridge where many people speculated the second shot was fired. It's completely different than anything I imagined. And when I say I want a true verdict on this case, I mean a true verdict. I don't mean a verdict based on speculation about what the crime scene may have been or what I thought it was. I mean what I know the crime scene is. I never tried a single case without visiting the

crime scene. I think I hear Chris McDonough jumping in and you mentioned something earlier about acoustics and what could have been heard next door. Well, I think the jury's going to have a question about what the survivors heard, Dylan and Bethany, and I'm just curious, will that be an issue at trial, which they could have figured that out if they could have gone to the scene? You know, Nancy, I think it's going to be. I agree with you 100 percent, because at this point, you know, the whole purpose of maintaining that crime scene, as we all know, is that 1%, just that 1%. The 99 may be there, i.e. the confidence of the state, et cetera, but it's that one juror that sits in that jury box and makes the determination of whether or not they believe the testimony that they're

hearing. There's nothing that can replace all five senses being immersed into that crime scene. Did one of the witnesses hear the stairs creaking when she testifies that Kohlberger was coming down the stairs? Did she look through her door? And if so, what was her vantage point in terms of visually what could she see what could she feel and it's gonna go just like that I think in in the jury and Nancy you know to add to that what about when the jurors see a teddy bear on one of the students beds and they feel the reality that these were human beings. The collectors of murderabilia

dehumanize the victims, but also beyond the sixth census is the humanization of the young people who live there. As I was saying earlier, seeing that they may have had a frat party or maybe there's a book lying around pertaining to a class they were taking or some of their studies, a pair of sunglasses, a picture of them on a boat. To picture and feel the victims is a way to empathically immerse yourself into what happened to them and who they were as human beings. And that's quite the opposite of these ghouls, as you refer to them, that are just picking away at the scraps of that house. It's to make these young people real.

And you can't do that by looking at a 3D scan or a picture or blood spatter evidence. Another issue is to Andy Kahn joining us. We have been told, of course, all the work was done by 8 a.m. It was done under the darkness of the morning hours, that the remains of that home have been taken and buried and are being guarded by police. All you have to do is search dump locations in Moscow, Idaho, and I've already pulled up one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Okay, so how hard is that going to be for these ghouls to locate it and wait for that

one moment and get something of that home? There's a will, there's a way. Just like in anything else, we've seen prison guards take items from high profile killers. There was a prison guard, believe it or not, that got a hold of Jeffrey Dahmer's shaving kit once Dahmer was killed in prison and then put it up for sale. So there's, you know, if you want something bad enough, you're going to find a way to get it. And right now in this day and age, Coburger is about as big a name as it gets in the murderability industry. And anybody that can get a piece of anything that he has, anything that's associated with him, and especially from a murder scene, it will be found and it will end up being sold in the open market.

We wait as justice unfolds. Goodbye, friend.