Law&Crime Sidebar - Kohberger Defense Drops BOMBSHELL in Last-Ditch Delay Bid

Episode Date: June 19, 2025

The fate of Bryan Kohberger's murder trial hangs in the balance as an Idaho judge considers whether to delay the August proceedings over explosive allegations of evidence leaks in a Dateline NBC episode. In a heated hearing, Kohberger’s defense argued the Dateline special (featuring unreleased cell data, surveillance footage, and search history) violated a gag order and tainted the jury pool. But prosecutors fired back, calling it a stall tactic in the high-profile case of the four University of Idaho students stabbed to death in 2022. Will the trial proceed as scheduled? Or will leaks, media frenzy, and witness drama force a delay? Law&Crime's Jesse Weber breaks down the details from the latest hearing.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:IF YOU OR A LOVED ONE HAVE SUFFERED PHYSICAL OR MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES DUE TO VIDEO GAMES, VISIT VGCLAIMS.COM/SIDEBAR TO ANSWER LESS THAN 10 QUESTIONS AND CHECK YOUR ELIGIBILITY TO FILE A CLAIMHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. In addition to what is going on with what happened with the date-lay episode, that's not all. There's a book set to be released just a few weeks from now to be followed by a docu-series on Amazon Crime. There's a claim that there's insights, sources that provide a book. information in this case. Everything that happens in this case continues to be talked about. And this court has a duty, a responsibility to make sure that Mr.

Koberger receives a fair trial. Big day in the Brian Koberger saga. The judge overseeing his criminal case had to decide whether to delay the trial currently scheduled for August. Allegations of leaks, potential tainted jury pool. So what happened? Let's talk about it. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by law and crime.

I'm Jesse Weber. All right, so before we get into the case, I have to tell you about something exciting that's happening here at Long Crime. So we've partnered up with On Patrol Live to bring their show to YouTube. If you're unfamiliar with On Patrol Live, Dan Abrams, let me tell you you're missing out.

It's one of the best shows out there. They follow police officers across the country in these high-stakes ride-alongs with over 50 cameras rolling live. And as you can imagine, the incidents they catch on camera are pretty wild from high-speed chases to daring rescues to intense standoffs and everything in between, the action never stops. So head on over to On Patrol Lives YouTube channel.

Make sure to subscribe. That channel link is in the description. The channel officially launches on Monday, June 23rd. Trust me, you will not want to miss it. Let's get back to the story. If you've been following the case of accused quadruple murderer Brian Koberger and expecting for this trial to begin in August, well, I'll tell you what, today was a very important day because it is all about allegations of leaks, pre-trial publicity,

whether this trial needs to be delayed in the Ada County Courthouse, to be more specific. Judge Stephen Hippler had to decide whether to grant a last-minute delay to the trial and also whether Coburger's defense can present evidence pointing to an alternative suspect in the brutal 22 stabbing deaths of four University of Idaho students. Rules, by the way, rulings that will dramatically shape the trajectory of the case against Brian Coburger, the 30-year-old criminology Ph.D. student accused of murdering Ethan Chapin, Xanacernodal, Kali Gonzalez, and Madison Mogan in their off-campus home on November 13, 2022. Prosecutors alleged that K-Burger's DNA was found on a K-Bart knife sheet that was left

at the crime scene. Cell phone records, they claim, place him near the victim's home before the killings. Surveillance footage apparently shows a white Hyundai Alantra matching Koberger's car, speeding away afterward, a potential eyewitness ID from a surviving roommate. Also, by the way, we have this separate sidebar that came out today about whether there is a mysterious other additional witness for the prosecution, potentially this delivery driver who saw Coburger at the crime scene. It is absolutely wild. You can go check that up right now on our YouTube page. But anyway, with opening statements currently scheduled for August, August 11th, Coburger's defense team, they are now pushing for a postponement.

Why? Because they are arguing that a recent Dateline episode, NBC, revealed previously undisclosed case details that has now potentially tainted the jury pool. The episode apparently included leaked information about a lot of potential evidence. Per reporting from Fox News in East Idaho News, we're talking cell phone data that apparently demonstrates Coburger's phone allegedly pinged almost a dozen. dozen times near a tower that provides coverage within feet of the crime scene. Surveillance footage from a neighbor's house apparently showing a car matching Coburgers in that

area multiple times. Internet searches allegedly from Coburger's phone about Ted Bundy, the Moscow killings, pornography. And the defense claimed that that May 9th broadcast, which featured again, never-before-seen materials that still remain unavailable through official court channels, not only did it potentially taint a judge. jury pool, it violated a gag order that has been in place in this case. Now, the defense is filing to delay the trial states, quote, the show repeatedly emphasizes the non-public nature of this information, stating it was obtained from unnamed sources close to the investigation.

Proceeding with a capital trial, meaning a death penalty trial, proceeding with a capital trial in August would violate Mr. Koberger's constitutional rights, as counsel needs additional time to assess this leaked evidence, complete investigations, and prepare an adequate defense. Now, Judge Hippler has already launched an investigation into this apparent leak suggesting that someone close to the case, close to the investigation may have violated this strict gag order. And there's already been a discussion of a special prosecutor being appointed here. The defense, they want to delay, but the prosecutors, they don't. They insist that this trial should proceed as planned. In fact, Lata County prosecutor,

Bill Thompson, wrote in a recent filing, it is time to try this case. the defense of seeking a, quote, perpetual continuance by chasing every rabbit hole. Hey, everybody, this is another law and crime legal alert. So recent allegations against the multi-billion dollar video game industry claim that video games are engineered for addiction. The claims include trying to make sense of the hold that video games seem to have over people where they just can't put the controller down. Every win triggers that hit of dopamine that creates a cycle of compulsion and that disrupts daily life. It harms mental health. But our legal sponsors are taken on the industry that is allegedly at many times put profit over safety and they're working

to potentially get compensation for all of those impacted. So if you or a loved one have suffered physical or mental health issues due to video games, then visit vG claims.com slash sidebar to answer less than 10 questions and check your eligibility to file a claim. Okay, let's start this off with defense counsel talking about the need to protect Coburger's rights. Your Honor, our motion to continue has been filed and is necessary to protect Brian Koberger's rights under the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the state of Idaho. Specifically, a continuance is necessary to protect his due process rights, his rights to a fair trial, his rights to effective assistance of counsel, rights to confrontation, Mr. Koberger's right to present a full defense, and if it

should come to it, a fair sentencing hearing and be free of cruel and unusual punishment. The record of this spans two and a half years, and it shows that this request does not come as a surprise. Looking through the history of this case shows that the defense has met challenges and difficulties along the way, but has been dedicated in meeting all of the deadlines. From there, there was a big discussion about discovery in this case, you know, the exchange of evidence from one side to the other. We have talked about discovery issues in this courtroom before, and that in large part brings us to need a continuance.

68 terabytes of information is a huge amount of information. There have been 23 requests for additional discovery over the span of two and a half years and seven motions to compel. When I say that this doesn't come as a surprise, that this comes from the record, I would direct the court to look back to May of 2023 and June of 20203, and our second motion to compel. Included in that was what was known as. Exhibit A from the dance, and that depicted how we were receiving discovery. So this is not a new issue.

This is something that's been coming up for a long time. We were receiving discovery, but it was such that you would get a file that would say hundreds of photographs, hundreds of pages of reports, each having to be looked at individually to know what was there and then organized. And then, of course, it all becomes about the media, right? These different shows and productions, and the burden this potentially imposes, particularly when it comes to a jury? This case has also faced

unique issues, starting with the media coverage of this high-profile case, non-dissemination orders that were addressed in courts, and then the grand jury materials that we had to fight to get access to before we could properly challenge

the grand jury indictment. We faced issues with discovery, particularly with the IGG materials. We spent a great deal of time trying to get access to those materials. Those were ultimately what we could get was ultimately presented in a motion to suppress, and that's preserved should there be a conviction in this case. We faced venue issues in this case, culminating in the change of venue and bringing us to Ada County.

The other reason that a continuance is appropriate in this case is based on the media coverage, the dateline issue that has been talked about in this courtroom before and was yet to come. The Dateline episode wasn't just a one-time deal back in May that continues to be talked about. Everything that happens in this case continues to be talked about. And this court has a duty, a responsibility to make sure that Mr. Koberger receives a fair trial. That comes from Shepard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333. and a continuance may be the way that the court can protect Mr. Koberger. That comes from Patton v. Yount 467 U.S. 1025.

In addition to what is going on with what happened with the Dateline episode, that's not all. There's a book set to be released just a few weeks from now to be followed by a docu-series on Amazon Prime. There's a claim that there's inside sources that provide information in this case. At the very least, the moment we start attempting to select a jury in this case, those things are going to be on everybody's TV, everybody's social media feed, and some of the very witnesses that will be expected to testify will be taking part in the docu-series, at least, and may be noted in the book. That is in and of itself an exceptional reason for us to have a continuance to let those things play out for a while.

And remember, this is a death penalty eligible case, and there are complications when you're talking about a death penalty case. At the first hearing in this courtroom, we discussed the discovery issues and not having read everything and being ready with a full investigation in this case. That was apparent through our motions to strike the death penalty. Our motions to compel expert disclosures filed in September and December of 2024 and request for more time to file our motions in Limney that was granted in January of 2025. Throughout the course of the motions in Limney and then a motion to strike death based on discovery issues in February and March of this year, the record is replete with notice that we are not prepared to go to trial in this case. The discovery is vast and we have not had a chance to review at all. That we met deadlines for experts shows our dedication to comply with court orders. It does not depict effective counsel ready to go to trial on this case.

We would submit that it's the court's responsibility to assess this motion to continue with a heightened due process that's required in death penalty cases. The death penalty case is different. That comes from Ford versus Wainwright. at 477 U.S. 399 at 411. The court must be sensitive to safeguard every avenue of due process. The Idaho Supreme Court said the qualitative difference between death and other penalties

calls for a greater degree of reliability when death is imposed, and that comes from State v. Creech 105, Idaho, 362 at 383. Looking at all of the constitutional rights, Mr. Koberger has, effective assistance of counsel really becomes the crux of how all of these other rights are covered for Mr. Koberger. And effective assistance of counsel applies both to the merits phase and the penalty phase of a death penalty case. The court, courts are guided and counsel is guided by the American Bar Association guidelines on capital cases, Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 at 524, said the ABA guidelines are guides to determine

what is reasonable. And that's talking about reasonable performance by defense counsel in a capital case. The Ninth Circuit in Andrews v. Davis at 944 F3D 1092 at 11.09 relies on the ABA guidelines as the proper measure to test an attorney's investment. In Idaho, our public defender statutes reference the ABA guidelines as applying to indigent defense. These apply to the full investigation of the merits phase and require us to raise all legal claims. They require us to perform a background on all witnesses that might be called, especially those being called by the state. That means that we have to review all discovery to be able to present a full defense for Mr. Coburger.

We cannot present what we are not aware of. Now before they wrapped up, they mentioned mitigating factors when it comes to Brian Coburger and the death penalty. We're required to perform in a way that the jury can carry out their function of individualized sentencing. That means that Mr. Coburger's backer. background has to be known and investigated and ready to present to the jurors. Evidence of his character has to be known and ready to present to the jurors and his circumstances have to be known and ready to present to the jurors.

That's addressed in the Woodson case and in the Lockett case. The jury must have the opportunity to consider all evidence that may weigh against the death penalty and that means anything from his life history. It is the duty of the defense to find and investigate all mitigating information. We do have several experts that would be ready for the mitigation portion of the case, should the case reach that phase. And they rely on understanding family history and Mr. Koberger's own history. They can only understand what they've been presented.

And the investigation to fully evaluate needs to be thorough. That means that records have to be collected. That means that interviews, collateral interviews have to be done, and those have not all been completed. It's not because of a lack of diligence in this case. Further, when things that are noted as red flags arise, those things must be investigated. Red flags aren't fanciful ideas of what else could we do in this case. There are real things that come up in the course of the investigation. and whether or not they're important to mitigation and presentation for a jury's consideration

requires time to investigate and collect records. Documentation is very important. So from there it was the prosecution's turn, and they talked about their objection to the defense's request. We acknowledge, as the court has, that that will pose challenges for jury selection. The issue, though, is not whether there is a lot of publicity. We know there's going to be a lot of publicity, regardless of when this trial happens. As Ms. Taylor said, people will continue to talk about this case. The issue is whether the court, using the procedures it has established or maybe even modifying them as the court wants to, can seat a panel of impartial jurors.

The Supreme Court of Idaho has found that despite widespread publicity, even on the day of jury selection, that is possible. that is possible in this case despite the challenges the other thing i would mention with respect to the publicity is that it puts us at the whim of the media every time there's a break story every time there's a new book or a new documentary are we going to continue the trial indefinitely and that seems to be the danger in what the defense is asking for we call it a perpetual continuance and we haven't seen a proposal about when this trial could take place if there's a continuance what seems to be the strategy here is just to delay and that leads me to i think the other

point than this taylor raised which was to say that you know this shouldn't be a surprise it is a surprise to us that a motion to continue to continue was made so late in the game after by the way the trial date was used to oppose an extension that we filed for with respect to our mental health expert at that point the defense said we can't possibly go down this road or give the government what the state what it wants because of the trial date once that issue is resolved and we get a motion to continue so I think what we have seen from from the defense is that they tried to use the mass amount of discovery to remove the death penalty from the table when that failed now we have a motion to continue so I do

think timing is relevant here. Again, and it's not just that the defense waits so long, it's that we have now have a very substantial record on which the court can deny this motion based on everything that's been put in front of the state and the court. In terms of the mitigation investigation, Your Honor, we believed but did not have confirmation. that the defense had a mitigation specialist until the reply brief on this motion alluded to an affidavit that that mitigation specialist submitted. So I don't know what that says. I don't know what the mitigation specialist has said, but the fact that there is a mitigation specialist, apart from the three attorneys and two investigators that are part of the defense team,

that person has one role, as I understand it, which is to prepare for the penalty phase if we get there. and that person, that specialist, has still time to continue doing whatever work they told the court they need to do. Your Honor, again, I would try to get back to the record and ask the court to look at the objective record when evaluating this motion. 55 mitigation witnesses, over 130 exhibits, a very robust team on the defense side, which includes their retained experts. Ms. Taylor and in the briefing really honed in this idea of a social life history for the defendant. I don't know if the court has read the expert reports of the defendant's forensic psychiatrist and then the licensed psychologist. I won't discuss the details in open court, but our position is that both of those specialists, well-trained, very experienced specialist, conducted significant, fulsome life history investigations.

They weren't just looking at bare records. They were talking to people from the defendant's past, from his present, his family, and developed parallel life histories. And in their reports, as I read them, no red flags that needed further investigation were noted. Nothing about those reports appeared to be incomplete. And the expert didn't say we are unable to reach the conclusions we need to reach for lack of investigation. So I think that is sort of proof in the pudding. We have a life history for the defendant.

The defense has amassed significant materials. and I thought we were going to be solely talking about the mitigation case that still needs to be developed. That is not a basis for a continuance, and to the extent there are ongoing discovery from the state that Ms. Taylor alluded to, I can represent that most of what was just turned over was our investigators speaking with witnesses that the defense has disclosed. So that's the nature of that discovery, is us responding to discovery from the defense. And that will continue, of course, to occur as we lead up to trial and witnesses make statements

that we need to disclose to the defense. So with that, Your Honor, I would again rest on the case law holding that a scorched the earth investigation is not what's required. And on the record before the court, the court should exercise its discretion to deny the motion. And here is what Judge Hippel

had to say about all that. All right, I'll take the matter under advisement and get an opinion out in short order. In the meantime, I fully encourage everyone to continue as if the trial is going to take place when it is scheduled for. Again, I've reserved the right to write the decision that I come to, but as of now,

I would tell you that it's likely you're going to trial on the date indicated. All right. So there you have it. We're going to see if this trial actually happens in August. We'll keep a very careful eye on it. But that's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcasts.

I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this law and crime series, ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.