The Ben Mulroney Show - Kohberger changes plea / German Pride fallout

Episode Date: July 28, 2026

GUEST:  Ashleigh Banfield, host & creator of the "Drop Dead Serious" podcast  GUEST:  Adam Zivo / National Post columnist If you enjoyed the podcast, tell a friend! For more of the Ben Mulroney Show, subscribe to the podcast! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://link.chtbl.com/bms⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Also, on youtube -- ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@BenMulroneyShow⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow Ben on Twitter/X at https://x.com/BenMulroney Insta: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ TikTok: ⁠⁠⁠@benmulroneyshow⁠⁠⁠ Executive Producer:  Mike Drolet Reach out to Mike with story ideas or tips at [e-mail] Enjoy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This podcast is brought to you by the National Payroll Institute, the leader for the payroll profession in Canada, setting the standard of professional excellence, delivering critical expertise, and providing resources that over 45,000 payroll professionals rely on. Summer heats up in FX's The Shards. Set in 80s, Los Angeles, the Shards follows a group of beautiful, privileged prep school students

who are preyed on by The Trawler, a serial killer targeting teenagers, across the city. This fever dream of youth, beauty, sex, and mystery is a must see. FX's The Shards. Streaming August 5th on Hulu on Disney Plus. Sign up now at Disneyplus.com. Now streaming on Disney Plus, the Hulu original series Furious follows FBI agent Alice Black,

played by Emmy Rossum, on the hunt for a mysterious and calculating serial killer. Both walk their own paths toward justice, and as their line, start to intertwine. The line between right and wrong begins to blur. New episodes week over week. Watch the Hulu original series Furious. Now streaming only on Hulu on Disney Plus. Welcome back to the Ben Mulroney show.

And when is a guilty plea, not a guilty plea? When is an open and shut case open again? You would hope that for the most heinous crimes, when a criminal and when a murderer takes responsibility, for those crimes that the families will be able to heal from their trauma and move on. Well, not so necessarily in the case of Brian Coburger, who violently killed four innocents in Idaho and after accepting his responsibility in their murders, went away for life, only to come back a year later and say,

do over please to discuss this. We're joined by a good friend of the show, Ashley Banfield. Ashley, thank you so much for being here. Hi, Ben. Good to see you again. It's a, I, listen, I, I, I love that we get to chat, and I know that, you know, Drop Dead Serious, your podcast sort of focuses on, on crime. It's not a happy conversation, though. This is, this is going to reopen wounds that were barely starting to heal in the families of those

who lost people to this, this monster. I would say, I don't think they'll ever heal. And this is, and pardon this. expression. This is truly twisting the knife. This is so painful to the families because at the very least, they could just put this awful memory of this awful man behind them and enjoy the fact that he would be miserable for, I don't know, maybe the next seven decades. He's young enough to live a long time in probably solitary for a very big chunk of it. But I think basically what this tells us, Ben, is that he's very bored. I think he's very, very bored. Ashley, let's remind people about what

got him in prison? Well, the four murders of the University of Idaho students that happened in 2022 were set to be adjudicated a year ago, like now, we were prepping a year ago almost today for a pretty lengthy trial, like three, four month trial. And Brian Koberger was up on four first degree murder charges with the death penalty in Idaho on the table. And shock to us all, he agreed to a plea bargain. Now, don't forget, this guy was a PhD student in criminology.

He's smart. So he definitely, he's no dumb, dumb, right? He knew what he was doing when he took the plea. But now he's saying, well, I really didn't know what I was doing and I got boondoggled. Oh, yes, but he said he wrote in his, in his, because not, it's not an appeal, right? because he gave up his right to an appeal in this agreement. So this is... Kind of.

Yeah, so, but he wrote, petitioner was convinced to falsely confess by coercion, disinformation, false promises, and the withholding of exculpatory discovery. Apparently, he also said he was misinformed as to what life on death row would be like. I don't know what he was expecting. Even I'm not a criminology. a PhD candidate. And you know. And I know it's not club med.

Yeah. No picnic. And quite frankly, crocodile tears for this moron. He truly, his bravado just oozes from every piece of his statement. It just makes me want to barf inside my mouth, honestly. What did you? Because he's just such a despicable person. What did you, when you read what he wrote, where did it take you?

What sort of assumptions were you prepared to make based on what he was going for? Couple things. First of all, I know we were all a little, you know, gobsmacked by the idea that you gave up your right to an appeal. What are you saying? You can't have another bite at the apple. However, the way it really works in American jurisprudence, and I don't think Canada's that different, is that you do give up your right to the appellate process for the kinks in the trial process, right? Which clearly didn't happen because he didn't get a trial.

but you don't give up your right ever to your constitutional rights to an attorney and to a robust defense. And so effectively written throughout his garbage, which I call his toilet paper motion, because I don't know what he wrote it on, but it was chicken scratch. It's assumed that he's suggesting this is an effective assistance of counsel. Now, you do get an option to mount or at least, you know, file a motion to tell the court. hey, I know I gave up my appeals, but I got ineffective assistance of counsel. So none of this was fair from the get-go. That's kind of what he's saying. Effectively, that is what he's saying without saying those words.

And you do have that choice. However, you've got to bring the goods. Yeah, you've got to prove it. And he hasn't brought the goods. So what is the next step now? Does a judge have to look at this and decide whether or not to do something? It feels like uncharted territory for a lot of people. We all expect you go to jail.

Oh, there's new information. I'm going to appeal. But we're on a different track right here. Yeah. And frankly, it actually isn't uncharted at all. And if this were an easy process, well, my God, the courts would be having to churn these babies out constantly. Because everybody's dissatisfied with prison when they get locked away for a life, no parole.

It stinks. Yeah. But the next process is that, yes, a dispassionate judge will look at this set of facts or whatever it is that he's asserting in this toilet paper motion. And there's really nothing in there that is a there there. Right. Unless and until he files an addendum or something else to actually provide what it is he's yapping his gums about. I don't believe for a moment. And I'm just going to say this outright as a journalist of many years in the true crime space. I'm going to say this outright. Anne Taylor was one of the best attorneys I think I've ever seen.

One of the best defense attorneys. You know, she was public counsel for him. He got it free. And she busted her tail for him. She saved his life. I still can't believe that he got the sweetheart deal that he got. But she did everything. And she really was a remarkable attorney.

So forgive me if I find it hilarious that he's now suggesting that somehow And Taylor decided to do some shenanigans and hide evidence from him during the plea process. Not at all. If she thought she was going to win that case, she was going to win that case. Ashley, so what's the most likely outcome, likely scenario to play out here? I think the toilet paper motion will be flushed down the toilet. That's just, again, I like to speak in common parlance because sometimes the arcanity of, you know, of jurisprudence and criminal process can be a little glaze over. But I do think that the judge will look at this.

And this is the question I have. Will the judge actually give Brian Koberger a hearing? Will he get a field trip from the Idaho maximum institution where he's sitting, cooling his heels in protective custody, which means it's isolation? He's in solitary. He's staring at four walls, probably getting his meals delivered. It's a miserable experience, right?

Who wouldn't want a field trip? So will the judge give him that field trip and let him come to the courthouse to be locked up in a different center bars with a couple of other views. And, you know, a van trip on the way, which is kind of nice because you get to see Idaho. And maybe a different kind of bologna sandwich. Will he give, will she or he give that hearing? And I don't know. I'm not sure that it could be summarily dismissed in chambers.

I don't know that the judge could look at it and say, there's nothing here. There's just a bunch of allegations with no material evidence that suggested is underlying. or will the judge actually ask for a hearing and say, where's your evidence? But here's the thing, Ben, honest to God. Again, we're talking about a PhD student criminology. He was asked a very specific question in court. I'm going to read it for you because I think we all really need to hear it again. The judge said, are you pleading guilty because you are guilty?

Meaning, are you doing this because it's paperwork and there's something else afoot? Or are you pleading guilty? you really did it. Right. You really plunged the dagger into those kids over and over again like a madman. And his answer was, yes.

So you don't get do-overs typically from that? No. Yeah, because he's also, to me, it's sort of, it takes the air out of this notion that, oh, I was, you know, prison is not what I was, I was told it was going to be.

Well, it doesn't really matter. If you say you're guilty because you did it, then it doesn't really matter whether your expectations were met and whether you're going to leave a five, star review on Yelp or not of your accommodations. As well, I'm very glad to have gotten this level set from you, Ashley. Remind us where we can hear your podcast.

It's Drop Dead Serious and you can find it on any of the listening podcast platforms. You can also find me on YouTube if you Google Ashley Banfield, but you spell it, L-E-I-G-H is probably the first thing that's going to come up. But Drop Dead Serious, love to have your audience come and join me. Ashley Banfield, thank you very much. Always good to see you, Ben. Hi, I'm Jane Koston, former writer and podcaster for places like The New York Times, The Atlantic, and National Review. And now I'm here to hang out with you.

Five days a week on what a day, Crooked's Daily News podcast. That's right. Now who's respected on both sides. Okay, yeah, it's not me. It's probably still just Dolly Parton. Moving on. These days, it's hard to separate what matters from all the noise, especially when the noise somehow also feels like it's made out of knives? That's why every weekday, the team and I scour the headlines to bring you the stories that matter most to the way you live.

in just 20 minutes. Listen to the show wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back. And we're still trying to make sense of the Berlin Pride hate attack there that saw a number of people stabbed, one dead, others seriously injured at the Pride event over the weekend. And so, but one of the odd parts about it is this people twisting themselves into a pretzel. trying to wish away who the attacker was and wish away the issues that might arise from this hateful attack. Here to discuss the knock-on effects, our good friend Adam Zivo from the National Post. Adam, welcome.

Thanks for having you on show. Okay, so, you know, we did our best to talk about this yesterday. There are a number of people that said, we don't want to politicize this event. I said with all due respect, pride politicizes a lot of stuff. And I'm not here. And just because it happened at pride means it could happen somewhere else tomorrow, which means nobody gets to dictate how we talk about this. How do you see it?

And what's what's been happening next? Well, I think that this conversation is inherently political because it was done, this attack was done for political reasons, right? This was an act of religious fundamentalism where an Islamist extremist wanted to kill as many gay people as possible. And he rammed his car into a crowd to do that. And if this were a Christian fundamentalist, I don't think anyone would have a conversation about how we shouldn't politicize this.

They would all say that Christian fundamentalism is bad and Christian homophobia is bad. And so I find it perplexing that just because this attack was committed by an Islamist, suddenly people are trying to avoid the problem. of political Islam and Islamist homophobia, even though we know that this is a huge issue in Europe and to a lesser extent in Canada too. And one thing I want to flag is that this attack was predictable. You know, just about a year or two ago, the chief of police of Berlin warned, publicly warned. This is reported in Newsweek and other media that Jews and LGBT people should avoid certain

Arab majority neighborhoods in Berlin for their own safety. Yeah, that's, that's, that is a warning that is shot across the bow. That is telling people that in their own country, they will not, they, there are certain places where they, their safety cannot be guaranteed. That, that is an issue. But what is it about certain communities within, uh, the LGBTQ community, uh, larger community that, that do not appreciate. the danger inherent in sort of allowing this sort of radical version of of Islam to grow in countries where they are currently safe, or generally safe, but less and less so.

Where's the self-awareness? Where's the idea of self-preservation? And is the irony not lost on them that they are, they are, they are, they are, they are protecting people who, if given a chance and if given the majority, that respect would not be reciprocated. Well, so I was an LGBT activist in Canada in the late 2010s, and I know that's seen well. And I know that the vast majority of LGBT activists in the West are very, very far on the political left. And they tend to fetishize or romanticize my name. communities and project their own politics upon these communities and as a result

many of these gay activists are reluctant to acknowledge the fact that these minority communities tend to be quite socially conservative they talk about listening to minority communities but don't actually do so and on top of that they think that any criticism of anything related to these communities is inherently hateful even though within these communities themselves, there are conversations about, for example, religious extremism. And I want to, of course, clarify that I don't think that all Muslims are bad or that Islam is inherently bad.

That's obviously not the case. I, in my own life, have many lovely Muslim friends who are moderate and well assimilated. But we know that there are certain kinds of religious extremists, just as there are Christian extremists, who have deep hatred in their hearts. And in some parts of the Middle East, they openly talk about this. For example, the UAE has taken a strong stance against political Islam, against Islamism, against radical interpretations of this religion because they view it as destabilizing. And Adam, why wouldn't we in the West take our cues from a country like the UAE who are saying,

we don't want to endanger what we have here in our country? and that's why we are banning this version, this perversion of our religion. Because, unfortunately, many of these far-leftist activists who are so reluctant to criticize Islamism have very limited actual experience with Muslim communities. And so what I am finding in my circles is that I have friends, for example, in the UAE who work on counter-extremism and who say, that the rhetoric of Islamophobia is often used to delegitimize, like very legitimate criticisms of Islamism,

and they find themselves just aghast by how certain North American progressives abuse this rhetoric. And they say, like, for example, the UAE, I found this wild. I was at a dinner recently with the UAE official back in the spring, and he mentioned that the country cut funding, for its students to study in Britain because students from the UAE would come back from Britain radicalized

by imams who are, you know, in Britain and preaching extremist interpretations of the Quran. They're preaching versions of the Quran that will not be preached in the UAE. Exactly. And when you try to mention this to some of these gay activists, it kind of, it causes a,

short circuit in their brain and there's almost like this suicidal inability to recognize that there's a problem here. For example, Pride Toronto published in Instagram post mourning the terrible attack on Berlin, right? At no point in any of their post do they recognize the fact that this was an Islamic Islamist terror attack, right? And I think that this kind of willful blindness is irresponsible. It throws sexual and gender minorities under the bus.

And fundamentally, it's not helpful. Like, we need to be able to have an open conversation about radical Islam. Because in order for us, if we don't have this, then you'll just have this kind of growing pressure of resentment from people who have been impacted from that. And it will eventually explode in a way that is much. much uglier than it otherwise would have been. It's okay for us to recognize that Islamism is a problem, but at the same time, recognize that everyday Muslim shouldn't be exposed to hate.

And I feel bad. I mean, after this happened in Berlin, all the major Muslim groups that we could find in in Germany condemned this. And it feels like they are now, the onus is now put on them to defend themselves against this person that doesn't represent the good and decent people who are helping build, helping build culture and helping build the country of Germany, just like, I would say, the exact same thing about the vast majority of the good and decent Muslims in this country who suffer every time an Islamist takes matters into his own hands and does something

on behalf of his, quote unquote, his faith. It's, I don't understand why nuance is lost on such a swath of people. But I guess that's a mystery we're going to have to solve another day, my friend. Thank you so much for joining us. It's the Jeep 85 years celebration event,

85 years of daring to ask, what if? Like, what if we didn't sacrifice capabilities for comfort or what if nothing on the road ahead could hold us back. For decades, we've chased every

what if, why not, who, where, and how. And the answer, because we can. Right now, get 0% financing for up to 84 months on select models, plus eligible customer

Get $1,850 in Jeep anniversary bonus cash on all Jeep models. See your Jeep dealer for details.