Hidden True Crime - Kohberger Trial at Risk?! Unpacking the EXPLOSIVE 40-Page Motion!

Episode Date: May 24, 2025

Bryan Kohberger's Team has filed a 40-page motion, citing numerous reasons the trial should be delayed. Lauren is going through every point, giving you the breakdown of what each argument really means. Jeffrey Zizz Analysis: Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hidden-true-crime/id1521619380?i=1000708961710 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/1a6CK1JMdMQUqnwebxZKhA?si=yZAC6uU9SX2bosSYvrsaWQ About Hidden True Crime: What started as a simple conversation at their dinner table became a captivating podcast. Join the dynamic duo of Dr. John Matthias, a criminal psychologist, and Lauren Matthias, an investigative journalist, as they delve into the psychological facets of unthinkable crimes every week. Their unique perspectives and in-depth analysis offer a fresh take on true crime storytelling. Thank you for your support through sponsorships, subscribing, listening, and becoming a Patreon member at ⁠Patreon.com/HiddenTrueCrime⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Lately, I've been trying to be more intentional about what I wear, intentional about everything, just choosing pieces that feel effortless, still put together, timeless, but also not overthinking it every morning. It's why I keep going back to quince. Their pieces just make getting dressed easier and I feel so classy. I feel elevated. The fits are flattering. The fabric is really high quality. Everything is wearable day to day. I actually got this really, really, beautiful yellow V-neck midi dress from them, and I paired it with some Italian leather sandals. It's one of those outfits that just works. It feels polished but still comfortable. It's exactly what I've been looking for. What surprises me, though, is the quality for the price.

Quince uses premium materials like European linen, organic cotton, but they cut out the middleman. So everything is priced way lower than you'd expect. Refresh. your every day with luxury you can actually use. Head to quince.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince, quince, u I and c-e-com slash hidden true crime for free shipping and 365 day of returns. Quince.com slash hidden true crime. Introducing Taco Bell's new jalapino citrus salsa with bright citrus, real red jalapinos, guahillo chilis. Usually, You add sauce to the food, but when the sauce is this good, the food is just there to get the sauce to your mouth.

That rolled cassidia, not a rolled cassidia anymore. Now it's a sauce shovel. Taco Bell's jalapeno citrus salsa. Get it with any item on the canteen of chicken menu while it's here. The participating U.S. Taco Bell locations for a limited time only, while supplies last, contact store for availability. Four friends full of promise gone in an instant. And the world has not stopped asking why. Poor Young Lives, Madison Mogan, Kaylee Gonzalez, Zana Kurnodal, and Ethan Chapin,

brutally taken in the middle of the night inside an off-campus home in Moscow, Idaho. And even if you never followed a true crime story before, this one pulls you in. The eerie silence of that small college town shattered by violence, the grainy surveillance footage, the trail of DNA, the whispered theories, and a suspect who feels more like a character from a style. psychological thriller than real life. Since the arrest of Brian Kovberger in late 2022, the world has been holding its breath, waiting for answers for justice for something that makes sense of the senseless.

Some are calling it the trial of the decade, set for August 11th, 2025. But now that date may slip away again. In a new 40-page motion, Kovberger's defense is asking for yet another delay, claiming they need more time and are pointing to leaked evidence that they argue is highly inflammatory and prejudicial. Is justice once again being postponed? If you've been following this case closely, you will know that something big dropped last week right after the pretrial hearing. Judge Hippler made a move that raised eyebrows across the courtroom and beyond. He ordered a full investigation into a major leak. One, he suspects, came from within.

in. And this wasn't just any leak. According to the judge, it potentially violated the standing gag order that's been in place since 2023. And now he's weighing whether to bring in a special prosecutor to hunt down the source. Someone, somewhere, handed over, sealed and previously undisclosed information to the media bypassing the court's direct orders. The leak exploded most publicly in a recent Dateline episode titled The Terrible Night on King Road. But here's where things get more complicated. The defense believes Dateline isn't the only outlet with insider access, and they are using that as fuel in a new motion to delay the trial even further. In today's episode, we're breaking down that motion piece by piece. Does the defense actually have a valid

claim? Brian Kovberger does deserve a fair trial. And could this leak jeopardy, this? And what does it all mean for the families waiting for justice? Whether you're counting the days to August 11th, 2025, or just catching up, this part of the case could be a game changer. So let's dive into the details. And you know emotion means business when it opens with a table of contents. That's not something you see every day in court filings. And it's usually a sign that what follows is dense, detailed, and in this case, intense. This new motion to delay the trial isn't just a quick ask. It's a 40-page, seven-part legal argument packed with claims concerns and constitutional questions. Each section lays out a different reason

why Brian Koberger's defense team believes the trial should be pushed back again. And now, reading this document word for word, would take hours and probably make your head spin. But don't worry, I've done the heavy lifting so that you do not have to. Instead of slogging through, the entire thing. We're going to break it down piece by piece. We'll walk through each of the seven arguments, starting with the first one, and take a closer look at what the defense is really trying to say. And whether any of it might actually stick. Let's dive in. Argument one says, quote, this court has an obligation to uphold Mr. Coburger's constitutional rights by vacating the trial date because defense counsel needs additional time to review discovery and prepare

for the complex merits and sentencing phases unique to death penalty cases, end quote. So as we know, capital cases, meaning the death penalty, is on the table. And that is the highest stakes a case can get. As quoted in the document, it's the most irreversible and profound penalty. The defense has an even greater obligation to make sure they are adequately prepared to defend their client when death is a possible outcome. And as of right now, Brian's team doesn't feel ready. They believe that having the trial in August would infringe on his rights because they need more time to review discovery and complete their own investigation into all of the evidence.

Argument two states, quote, Mr. Koberger has myriad constitutional rights during these proceedings, all of which are dependent on counsel having the time and resources to prepare for a capital trial in accordance with established professional norms and quote. Now this section explains that due to the Sixth Amendment and the right to do process, Brian is entitled to a sufficient amount of time to allow his counsel to adequately prepare for trial and sentencing. It also says that it's a defense attorney's duty to conduct a thorough investigation of the case's circumstances and explore all avenues leading to relevant facts. In addition to effective assistance of counsel, Brian also has the right to have a meaning meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense, even more so than a non-capital case. In order to present a complete defense, all defendants are entitled to expert assistance

to analyze and interpret evidence. The document states that Brian's defense counsel cannot know the full range of experts they may need for trial or the penalty phase until after an extensive investigation has been conducted. This section also states that in a capital case, the jury must be given the opportunity to consider all evidence that may weigh against a death sentence, including a defendant's life history, an entire life history. And if a jury is denied this opportunity, if the defense fails to conduct a complete investigation, or if they weren't given enough time to do so, then a death sentence cannot stand. Argument three is titled, quote,

counsels, professional and ethical obligations in a capital case, end quote. The American Bar Association, or ABA, publishes various guidelines that cover different areas of legal practice. This includes a national standard for the defense of capital cases in order to ensure high-quality legal representation for anyone facing the death penalty. The ABA guidelines state, quote, every task ordinarily performed in the representation of, a criminal defendant is more difficult and time-consuming when the defendant is facing execution,

end quote. This means that Bryant's counsel must take extraordinary efforts to defend him. They should thoroughly investigate and challenge every minute piece of the evidence the state claims to have. They must find, interview, and scrutinize the backgrounds of the state's witnesses, search for other potential witnesses who might challenge the state's version of events and subject all forensic evidence to rigorous independent scrutiny. They must object to anything that appears unfair or unjust, even if it involves challenging well-accepted practices. This section also states that Brian's defense must, quote,

conduct an exhaustive, unparalleled life history investigation, analyze hundreds of documents and interviews, and compile all of this information into a cohesive narrative for the sentencing phase. end quote. So in this document, we can see just how much more involved, more in-depth, and more thorough the work is that the defense has to do in a capital case. That may seem obvious, but in some of these cases, I even find myself at times frustrated with the defense for objecting to every little thing asking for more time filing this motion and that motion when the crimes are so heinous. It's sometimes easy to wonder why the defense is pushing so hard,

for a client that seems to the public deplorable. But as we can see in these ABA guidelines, it's literally their job. They legally have to question and scrutinize every single thing. Next in this section, the defense gets into what actually qualifies an investigation as, quote, unquote, constitutionally adequate. It states that in the sentencing phase, the defense has to complete a comprehensive investigation into the client's entire life history. This is so that the jury has a complete picture of any potential mitigating circumstances, which are facts that can reduce the defendant's culpability or the severity of the crime. The document says that the life history section is so central to death

penalty cases that there is an additional set of guidelines specifically outlined the defense's responsibility in this piece of case preparation. They must conduct an ongoing, exhaustive, and independent investigation into Brian's character, history, record, circumstances of the offense, and anything else that may provide a basis for a sentence less than death. This also includes the client's family's life history and anyone else who may be able to shed light on circumstances that shaped the client's life. There is prenatal, pediatric, and adult health history, meaning they want to know about Brian while he was still in the womb. Was he exposed to harmful substances in utero? Was he a healthy baby? Is there a family history of genetic disorders? Any pattern of behavior? Was there any maltreatment or neglect as a child? Did he have a juvenile record? Did he have to have physical,

emotional, mental, or social development issues? How was his education? What is his employment history? Is there a history of trauma, substance abuse, or mental health problems? What is his religion, his sexual orientation, cultural and community influences? Are there any socioeconomic or political factors? So as you can see, when they say an exhaustive life history investigation, they mean exhaustive. In order to collect and analyze all of this information, the defense must locate, quote, unquote, life history witnesses. including family members extending three generations back, friends, teachers, classmates, coworkers, employees, doctors, neighbors, and anyone else familiar with the defendant.

The guidelines state that these interviews are to be conducted face-to-face, one-on-one, and after trust and a rapport is developed to elicit sensitive information. The motion says, quote, unsurprisingly, this process takes time because especially many witnesses must be interviewed multiple times even after report. has been established. The ABA guidelines are clear that this exhaustive investigation is constitutionally required despite the fact that it is a time-consuming and expensive undertaking, end quote. The defense also states that even though interviewing people and collecting records may require hundreds or even thousands of hours, that is not the end of their investigation.

After they acquire all of this information, with the help of experts, they must then decipher how, the information can be used in mitigation. According to the defense, contextualizing Brian's mitigating life history information is essential because jurors are always looking for the why in these situations. The document says, quote, compiling a life history is not merely a checklist of tasks. It is a complex and rich endeavor that focuses on a person's identity and goes to the heart of the human experience, end quote. Without this investigation, the defense states that it would be impossible for a jury to conduct an individualized sentencing, meaning that Brian's entire history is taken into account when deciding for or against the death penalty.

They also need specialized experts to tell the client's life story in a way that answers all of these why questions and connects the client's life circumstances to the commission of the crime. However, in a footnote, the defense clarified that by bringing up all of these tasks related to the sentencing phase, they are in no way suggesting that a conviction is imminent. They say, quote, in a case where the allegations are sensational in nature and have been the subject of intense media scrutiny, to say the least, a comprehensive and accurate life history presentation is even more crucial to ensure the aggravated nature of the crime and the public outcry does not overcome the jury's ability to weigh both options.

End quote. Argument for states, quote, counsel requires additional time to fulfill the minimum requirements described above, end quote. In this motion, the defense is arguing that they need more time to review all of the relevant discovery and integrate the evidence into a comprehensive defense. They also need to pursue more investigations into alternate perpetrators. That third party, alternate perpetrators. They add that another reason that they need more time is because of the state's, quote,

failure to fully abide by this court's discovery and expert disclosure deadlines, end quote. The motion also says, quote, counsel requested that this court alleviate these problems by precluding the death penalty as a possibility, freeing up counsel's time to focus only on the merits phase and removing the heightened standard of reliability that governs death penalty proceedings. Because the court denied that motion, counsel is obligated to seek a continuance, end quote. Now, I really wonder what they might really want from this motion. Do they really want more time, a continuance, or the idea that the judge can once again remove the death penalty and they can move forward with August 11th.

This actually worked, let me remind you, for Lori Balladeebel. And the death penalty was removed instead of a continuance. But there is one big difference. Lori had not waived her right to a speedy trial. Thus, the court's hands were sort of tied. They removed the death penalty. But Brian Kovberger, they could push his trial back. He did waive his right to a speedy trial.

Before I switched to wealth front, my APY was probably 0.1. Like, it was a joke. I was literally getting pennies. Once I switched to chit-ching. With a Wealthfront cash account, earn up to 4.2% APY on your cash. The high APY with Wellfront was a clear winner. There are no petty fees. Every month, there's this much that I'm getting an interest in.

I didn't have to do anything. My money is working hard on its own, and I can trust Welfront is taking care of me. Earn more on your uninvested cash with a wealthfront cash account. No account fees, no minimums, and no strings attached. Get started today. At Wealthfront.com, clients were paid $1,000 for their testimonials, creating a conflict of interest. Outcomes vary. 3.3%. Base APY as of January 30th, 2026 is representative variable and earned on funds swept to program banks.

0.65% new client boosts for three months on up to $150,000. Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage LLC member FINRA SIPC, not a bank. These and eligibility requirements may apply to certain checking features of the cash account. When it comes to weight loss, you don't need more advice. you need more of what works. That's Weight Watchers. Designed for one thing.

Better weight loss results. With real coaches who show up week after week in host workshops and Q&As on a schedule that works for you. And real tools designed to take the guesswork out of what to eat, how to move, and how to build habits that actually last. Because real results don't just come from more advice.

They come from the support to follow through. That's why Weight Watchers' Core Plus members lose three and a half times more weight than people who do it on their own. Get more of what works with Weight Watchers Core Plus. More tools, lower support, more personalization, more of what actually works. Get started today at Weight Watchers.com. In a six-month clinical trial of over 370 people, those using Weight Watchers saw significantly better results than those following standard

nutritional advice alone. See the 2025 in the AJCN. The defense claims that the prosecution has, has not provided them with a list of exculpatory or impeaching evidence. So they need more time to go through the entire discovery to find any themselves. Again, exculpatory evidence is information that suggests a defendant is innocent. Basically, evidence that is favorable to the defendant. And this part is a little long, but I will read it to you because it is important.

It says, quote, Cutting off this review before counsel can complete it would significantly prejudice Mr. Coburger. The state's case is circumstantial. Mr. Coburger was not identified as a person of interest until weeks after the crime and after he was identified, law enforcement ceased investigating all other possibilities. While counsel can explain this in trial, every experienced trial lawyer knows that trials are essentially, quote, story battles, high-stake duels where the prosecution and defense each tell

competing narratives about the same set of events. Ultimately, the jury decides which story feels more true and more coherent. Put a pin in that. We're going to come back to that. The jury decides which story feels more true and more coherent. I'll go on. Even though the burden of proof rests with the prosecution and the defense bears, no burden at all, humans are driven by narratives. That reality forces the defense to counteract the state's narrative with another compelling story. When the central issue is the identity of the perpetrator, even a reasonable doubt case implies a story that someone else did it. But it is a story with a huge hole and one likely to be ineffective. The jury might speculate that,

that if this defendant did not do it, there should at least be some evidence suggesting that someone else did it, end quote. Okay, let's unpack that because basically what the defense is saying is that if the jury cannot see a possibility for anyone else who have committed this crime, they may find Brian not guilty due to circumstantial evidence alone. However, if they are able to investigate and find another potential perpetrator or perpetrators that may help the jury to decide, okay, Brian wasn't the only person who could have possibly done this. This is a very classic defense strategy, often referred to as Saudi, S-O-D-D-I. The Saudi defense is one of the most commonly used defenses in jury trials for violent crimes, and that stands for some other dude

did it, Saudi. The idea behind Saudi is simple. The defense isn't seeing a crime didn't happen, they're just saying that their client wasn't the one who did it. And in these cases, the defense doesn't necessarily know who the real culprit is, just that it wasn't their client. And that's where Saudi comes in. Saudi is especially useful in cases where there is no denying that the crime took place. We know that this crime took place. These murders took place. And when that's the situation, the defense strategy is to point the finger elsewhere. Some other dude did it. And again, the defense. in the Delphi case, to remind you of another case that I covered in Delphi, Indiana,

Abby Williams and Libby German were murdered. In that case, Richard Allen was on trial. He's been convicted of killing those two best friends. The Delphi defense attempted to use odinism as their Saudi defense, although the judge never did allow odinism into trial. And after Richard Allen was convicted during appeals, the defense then switched to a previous suspect, Ron Logan. And the defense in that case pulled both of those Saudi arguments in odinism investigation and or Ron Logan. They pulled those straight from the discovery, the investigation and the evidence that the state handed over to the defense. So after the state handed over all of their discovery, the defense went in and they found two other third party ideas. Ron Logan was one. Odinism was another.

And that is what Brian Koviger's defense is asking for more time to do. From what I just read, it seems as if they don't even yet have a solid Saudi argument yet, and they need more time to go through all of the discovery to sort of find another culprit or culprits. But I also need to go back to the thing I said, put a pin in it. To criticize what I just read, they said, again, quote, ultimately the jury decides which story feels more true and more coherent. And I really take issue with the word feel in that sentence. It is, actually the jury's job to assess evidence and facts presented during trial and to put their feelings and their biases aside when assessing the evidence to make a logical, critical decision

on the evidence and not what feels more true. Other critiques or things that sort of got me there reading that paragraph, I thought after attending court, I attended the pretrial hearing, they might have had a solid, soddy scenario going on and it doesn't seem that they do yet. But who knows, I'll continue. The defense wrote, quote, the state spent years honing in on one specific story that Mr. Coburger's guilt, and that is of Mr. Coburger's guilt and ignoring all other possibilities. Defense counsel has a bigger job in not only reviewing their case for guilt, but figuring out what the state missed and exploring other alternative possibilities. The inability to review the discovery and incorporate all of the information into a cohesive defense prior to trial would nearly guarantee that counsel cannot mount an effective defense on Mr. Coburger's behalf.

Because his life is on the line and due process must be given its highest regard, this court should grant counsel the time necessary to ensure a fair trial, end quote. So up next is where in the document, is where we get into the alleged information leaks. The leaks are coming up. Argument five states, quote, a continuance is also necessary to investigate and remedy the prejudice of highly inflammatory publicity released just weeks before the current trial date,

including the recent Dateline NBC special, and a forthcoming book, end quote. Now, as we know, Judge Hippler previously issued a non-dissemination order, also known as a gag order, which restricted the release of certain information to the public in order to preserve the integrity of the case and protect Brian's right to a fair trial. Well, as we also know, someone did not abide by that order, at least one person, if not more. And now the judge and defense team are not happy. The defense cites the terrible night on King Road, Dateline episode in their motion, which aired on NBC on May 9th, just weeks before the trial is set to begin.

We will discuss more in depth what information was said during that episode. Many people have been asking me. But the document refers to it as details and materials and video footage and cell phone records and photographs of documents, all of which are supposed to be sealed from the public. The document says, quote, the show repeatedly emphasizes the non-public nature of this information, stating that it was obtained from unnamed sources who are close to the investigation, and that the materials were obtained exclusively by Dateline. Much of the investigative materials presented by Dateline was taken out of context and will not be admissible at trial because it lacks reliability, end quote.

The defense, in other words, believes that the materials were curated to specifically, specifically promote a narrative of guilt and most likely came from someone currently or formally associated with law enforcement or the prosecution team. If that turns out to be the case, this would raise serious questions about the objectivity, judgment, and credibility of the people tasked with investigating and presenting the state's evidence, especially if any of those people are called as witnesses. As we have seen in other cases, testimony from law enforcement officers is extremely important. And if it turns out that they can't be trusted not to leak sealed information, they may not be credible to testify at all. And I want to remind you of other leaks that we

have seen in other gag orders. I'm going to go back to the Delphi Indiana case, the trial of Richard Allen. Interestingly enough, though, it was the prosecution that was pointing fingers at the defense, in that case that the defense made leaks against the gag order, not the prosecution. The document, though, will continue, also states that when a show-like dateline presents information as quote-unquote exclusive and from someone with inside knowledge, it creates an aura of credibility and secrecy that can influence the public's perception. Framing the information as uncensored insiders that the public isn't meant to see can enhance the material's persuasive power. Specifically, the defense states that the episode made speculative assertions regarding the killer's motives, including unfounded sexual motivations. It also had dramatic reenactments of animations depicting the alleged crime, emotional interviews with people connected to the victims, all accompanied by dramatic music designed to elicit a strong emotional response. The defense stated that the episode had commentary from experts who made sweeping assertions that weren't grounded in evidence as well.

And this included potential motives, the perpetrator's psychological state, and Brian's personal history. In the defense's opinion, this presents the public with a one-sided narrative that can shape potential juror perception before admissible evidence has even been presented. So what exactly was in this Dateline episode, because as I said, people have been asking. You have been asking. Well, for starters, there was never before seen surveillance video from a home nearby where the murders took place at 112 King Road. The footage showed a car similar to Bryan's driving by at various times

just before the four students were killed. The episode also claimed that FBI cell data showed that Brian's phone pinged several times near a tower that provides coverage to the area of the King Road house. There was also a lot of information pertaining to Brian's online search history. This included researching serial killer Ted Bundy and reportedly looking at pornography that had words like sleeping, forced, drugged, and passed out, which many have pointed out after learning of the searches on Dateline, which again were sleeping, forced, drugged, and passed out. They realized that another recent episode

at Hidden True Crime with my co-host, Dr. John Matthias, he's a clinical and forensic psychologist, a criminal psychologist. They had said, well, if Brian Coburger, now they have wondered, if Brian Coburger had somnophilia, the episode is about a man named Jeffries is, who was recently

charged with murdering and torturing his client, Marsha Norman. And if you want to explore and understand this further, you can head to the description of the episode, this episode to find that analysis by Dr. John, titled, What This Pastor Did Will Haunt You. Psychologist reacts to Jeffrey Zizz. I know that was a bit of a tangent, but that is some information from the Dateline episode that has made us all wonder.

But back to the other evidence shown in the Dayline episode, there were Brian Coburger's Amazon purchases from just a few months before the murder, which included a K-bar knife and sheath matching the sheath found at the crime scene with his DNA. The episode also claims that in the days after the murders, Brian had an incomplete purchase for an identical knife and identical sheath. And we all speculate that perhaps it was to throw off investigators if he was found to have a complete set. New information was also added to clarify the timeline of events that night. After the murders took place, Dayline reported that Brian's phone allegedly returned to the area of the King Road house

at around 9.12 a.m. the next morning. He then traveled to an area. along the Snake River in Clarkston, Washington, which may be where he disposed of the murder weapon and other potential evidence like bloody clothes. The episode reported that investigators found that Brian placed several phone calls to his parents in the hours after the murder took place

and took a selfie in a black hoodie shortly after that as well. There was also the speculation that one of those photos of him in a black hoodie resembled Ted Bundy, And the Dayline episode definitely speculated as to whether he admired serial killer Ted Bundy. There were also alleged photos on Brian's phone of young women who attended Washington State University and the University of Idaho, which is where the victims attended. These women supposedly included close friends of the victims. And after the murder investigation began, Brian allegedly searched his own name and viewed news cases,

news stories about the case. Besides the Dateline episode, the defense also has issues with an upcoming book called The Idaho for an American Tragedy, which is scheduled to be released on July 14, 25. July 14th, 2025. That's 16 days before the trial is supposed to begin. And this book is written by the best-selling crime author James Patterson. So it will undoubtedly get a lot of sales from his fans. as well as people just interested in this case.

On Amazon, the book's blurb describes Brian as a, quote, brilliant grad student, loner and a parent in Sal, end quote. It also says things like, quote, the evidence is in, now you are the jury, end quote. Not only that, but the book claims to have unmatched access to the investigation with interviews from local law enforcement. And if this is true, that means the non-decentral, order has been violated more than once and long before the Dateline episode.

The court previously emphasized Judge Hippler's responsibility to ensure that Brian receives a fair trial, free from influence or prejudicial media coverage. The defense believes that a continuance is necessary in order to properly investigate the source of the leak and to mitigate any negative effects that this publicity could cause, especially so close to trial. They cited the Supreme Court, who has previously said that the passage of time can reduce the taint of media exposure and the delay between media saturation and trial can reduce its prejudicial impact.

In the motion, the defense says, quote, the timing of the trial is a key factor in ensuring juror impartiality as emotional intensity and memory of prejudiciality. material tend to fade over time, end quote. The defense claims that after the investigation into the leak occurs and the extent of the misconduct is revealed, the violations could warrant remedies more serious than a simple delay. And I don't know what they mean by that. They sort of left that open-ended. Remedies more serious than a simple delay.

I don't know what those remedies are. argument six in the motion says quote reversal is more likely than not in any case resulting in a death sentence end quote the defense states that statistically almost two-thirds of death penalty cases are eventually overturned due to errors even if that's years or even decades after the conviction and that is a startling statistic i might say to have read one frequent cause for reversal is in effectiveness due to lack of an exhaustive investigation. As we already read and learned, this takes a lot of time, and the defense doesn't feel ready. They are asking for continuance, in part, to avoid the costly and time-consuming process

of reversing a conviction and death sentence later down the line. The seventh and last argument in the motion says, quote, a continuance is reasonable and necessary under the circumstances, end quote. And even though there's no one specific rule a judge can point to when determining whether or not to grant a continuance, they can't deny one simply in favor of moving the trial along more quickly, especially if the defendant has waived their right to a speedy trial. They completed their motion by stating, quote, this request is not made lightly. Defense counsel has worked around the clock actively preparing for trial,

appointment to this case filed all motions in a timely matter, complied with expert disclosure deadlines, and had expected to proceed on schedule. However, it has become clear that without additional time, the defense cannot complete review of the necessary discovery, meaningfully, respond to all of the state's amended expert disclosures, and incorporate the information into an effective defense and finish critical sentencing phase investigations while prompt administration of the justice of justice is important to both the state and Mr. Coburger, the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial outweighs a modest delay, end quote. Wow.

So I do want to ask, what do you think about the motion? I would love to hear your thoughts and comments. Do you think that the judge will grant a continuance or keep the August trial date? Honestly, my Airbnb is already booked. I plan to give daily recaps each day during the trial each and every day. And I had my August plan. But even though this is going to be an explosive trial, the last thing any of us want is a potential conviction being thrown out on appeal. That being said, I do think that Brian's defense team made some good arguments for a continuance,

even if the state fires back that they have had plenty of time to get their investigation done and defense strategies sorted out. And honestly, I think that too, I'm like, what have you guys been doing? You know, it does seem like they've had plenty of time. I'm going to be honest. But I do think the prejudicial leaked information is a little harder to ignore.

While the defense thinks that this can be remedied by allowing for more time to pass between the media coverage and the trial, there are other legal experts who disagree. Some think that all of those issues can be easily worked out in the jury selection process. And there will always be people who don't watch Dateline, the news, YouTube, or anything true crime related.

I, again, was recently in Boise, Idaho. And I ask everyone, have you heard of this? When I'm taking an Uber, do you know about this? You might be surprised that not everybody knows about this crime. Another expert stated that if there is a continuance, it could be as short as 60 days, but potentially much longer. So we will have to see what Judge Hipler says. And if these arguments will convince him to push the trial back yet again. I just want to say thank you before I end for supporting our work by subscribing to our channel. We will continue reporting on this case as well as all of the

other cases that we are following. And next week, I am headed to Arizona to report on Lori Valo DeBel's next trial, her third trial. And may justice be served then. as well. Thank you for subscribing. Before I switched to Wealthfront, my APY was probably 0.1. Once I switched to chiching, with the Wealthfront cash account, earn up to 4.2% APY on your cash. I can trust. Wellfront is taking care of me. Make your money earn more. Get started at Wealthfront.com. Clients were paid $1,000 for their testimonials creating a conflict of interest. Outcomes vary. 3.3%. Base API as of January 30th 2026. Is representative variable and earned on funds

swept to program banks. 0.65% new client boost for three months on up to $150,000. Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brogeridge, LLC, member FINRA, SIPC, not a bank. Before I switched to wealth front, my APY was probably 0.1. Like, it was a joke. I was literally getting pennies. Once I switched, chiching. With a wealthfront cash account, earn up to 4.2% APY on your cash.

The high APY with Wellfront was a clear winner. There are no petty fees. Every month, there's this much that I'm getting an interest, and I didn't have to do anything. My money is working hard on its own, and I can trust Wellfront is taking care of me. Earn more on your uninvested cash with a wealthfront cash account.

No account fees, no minimums, and no strings attached. Get started today at wealthfront.com. Clients were paid $1,000 for their testimonials, creating a conflict of interest. Outcomes vary. 3.3% base API as of January 30th, 2026, is representative variable and earned on funds swept to program banks. 0.65% new client boosts for three months on up to $150,000.

Direct deposit $1,000 a month and fund an investing account for a 0.25% increase. Cash account offered by Wealthfront Brokerage LLC member FINRA SIPC, not a bank. Fees and eligibility requirements may apply to certain checking features of the cash account.