4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #92

[Dre]

I feel like she’s trying to force a change of venue with that stunt. 400 people is a lot of people to weird out- of course they’re going to talk about it to friends, fam, coworkers etc. those questions were WILD and I enjoyed seeing Bryan perk up and seem befuddled at his own attorney.

I do think moving it to Ada county is a good idea at this point, but feels like a dirty way to do it..

AT’s putting up such a stink about having to pause the crappy surveys before being heard felt really childish and disrespectful. To double down and keep arguing is just not a good look at all.

If I were JJCJ I’d be salty, he’s been nothing short of respectful and gracious with the defense this entire time.

Jmo!

 

[Balthazar]

The gag order is not an order to the media.

Agreed and the questions that were formed by the consultant were based upon what is already out in the media which anyone could find and read on their own as per the standard for developing such a questionnaire.

All JMO.

 

[Sundog]

It's possible that AT had to make her protests to the judge regarding lost time, etc. in order to get this on the record in the event of an appeal. She's just doing her job in a death penalty case. She needs to fight hard for a change of venue and to carry out the kind of research that will help her make a good case for it. If this survey is deemed inappropriate by the judge, which it appears that is the ruling he is making, then they will have to find a way to move forward with a new survey - and new timeline for the case - so that it doesn't disadvantage the defendant. That, or just change venues for the trial.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Agreed and the questions that were formed by the consultant were based upon what is already out in the media which anyone could find and read on their own as per the standard for developing such a questionnaire.

All JMO.

The order is on the attorneys and their agents.

 

[Balthazar]

The order is on the attorneys and their agents.

The consultant would not have been exposed to any materials covered by the gag order because that would not be helpful in developing the survey instrument. AT stated in the hearing very clearly that the consultant did his own research by reading media accounts of the case.

JMO.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

The consultant would not have been exposed to any materials covered by the gag order because that would not be helpful in developing the survey instrument. AT stated in the hearing very clearly that the consultant did his own research by reading media accounts of the case.

JMO.

Doesn't matter what he was exposed to. The order applied to him.

 

[Chloegirl]

It's possible that AT had to make her protests to the judge regarding lost time, etc. in order to get this on the record in the event of an appeal. She's just doing her job in a death penalty case. She needs to fight hard for a change of venue and to carry out the kind of research that will help her make a good case for it. If this survey is deemed inappropriate by the judge, which it appears that is the ruling he is making, then they will have to find a way to move forward with a new survey - and new timeline for the case - so that it doesn't disadvantage the defendant. That, or just change venues for the trial.

I agree.

I would think this type of thing would have had to go through the courts for approval before being performed. It just seems like she went ahead without sort of (what did she call it with the IGG?) "showing her work". It would be something I would want to oversee, consider the tone, etc.

A change of venue might be a very good idea, it just felt forced and not done very well. Maybe that was the goal. JMOO

 

[SpiderFalcon]

Doesn't matter what he was exposed to. The order applied to him.

Yes, and he should have been exposed to the gag order, and AT "says" she sent it to him, but she doesn't know why he didn't receive it.

 

[Megnut]

Consider where we'd be if no one came forward about the character and content of those phone surveys. AT reverse engineers a change-of-venue basis. Shows bias without ever reporting that the whole survey was an exercise in leading questions. If you weren't aware of the case, weren't biased yet, now you are.

And by creating this imaginary boundary-- she didn't do the polling, she didn't write the questions, she's claiming insulation. That's not how that works!! And to them ask to benefit in any way?! Spoilt fruit and she knows it. Gall.

It remains -- he was acting as her agent. She is liable for his actions. Hard stop.

JMO

 

[Balthazar]

Doesn't matter what he was exposed to. The order applied to him.

The questions in survey came from 269 newspaper articles published in 3 different newspapers according to the Edelman attachment to the defense motion.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/2024/032624_Memorandum_in_Support_of_Objection_to_the_States_Motion_for_Order_Prohibiting_Contact_with_Prospective.pdf

From page 7 and 8 of the Edelman attachement to the document linked above:




Either BT and JJJ failed to read the Edelman attachment to the defense motion or BT and the judge don't understand it. It is crystal clear, even to the most casual reader, that all questions came from information that was in the 3 newspapers cited and therefore outside of the gag order.

JMO.

 

[Sundog]

I agree.

I would think this type of thing would have had to go through the courts for approval before being performed. It just seems like she went ahead without sort of (what did she call it with the IGG?) "showing her work". It would be something I would want to oversee, consider the tone, etc.

A change of venue might be a very good idea, it just felt forced and not done very well. Maybe that was the goal. JMOO

I don't know if surveys like this are usually approved by the judge in the case, so we don't know if AT should have "shown the work" to the judge for approval. From Judge Judge's response, it didn't sound to me like he had expected that AT would have shown him the work in advance, but that he expected her to conduct it in a certain way. AT did make it clear that it wasn't her responsibility or a requirement that she share the survey with the prosecution. So I doubt it was a requirement either to share it with the judge.

 

[al66pine]

Edelman: "No Evidence of ... Impact" on Prospective Jurors.

Per Dr. Edelman's declaration, his survey concluded that media coverage caused bias in Latah residents, giving def. atty grounds to argue for Change of Venue.

Later in his declaration made under penalty of perjury, he basically dismissed the idea that his survey could have caused bias:
"The notion that polling 400 community residents (1% of the Latah County population 18, and over) is the cause of potential bias in a county that has been saturated with hundreds of highly prejudicial newspaper articles, television news stories, and social media posts is not credible...."
"There is no evidence that conducting the survey has had any impact on the master list of prospective jurors or potential venire in this case." *

HOW did Dr. Edelman reach his "no evidence of impact" CONCLUSION? The declaration cites no basis.

Not trying to be a smart aleck, but did Edelman or Research Strategies, Inc., other persons or organiztions conduct another survey later? A survey like the presumably well designed, professionally executed initial survey now at issue? Or search w a different method or tool?
Just wondering.

BTW, not criticizing or questioning Dr. Edelman, his experience or credentials, his company, etc. Wondering about that specific conclusion.

________________________________
* DECLARATION OF BRYAN EDELMAN
(e-number page 13, hard copy page 9)
Attachment to 03/26/24 Memo. in Support of Objection

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/2024/032624_Memorandum_in_Support_of_Objection_to_the_States_Motion_for_Order_Prohibiting_Contact_with_Prospective.pdf

 

[sripey]

Agreed and the questions that were formed by the consultant were based upon what is already out in the media which anyone could find and read on their own as per the standard for developing such a questionnaire.

All JMO.

The questions in survey came from 269 newspaper articles published in 3 different newspapers according to the Edelman attachment to the defense motion.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/2024/032624_Memorandum_in_Support_of_Objection_to_the_States_Motion_for_Order_Prohibiting_Contact_with_Prospective.pdf

From page 7 and 8 of the Edelman attachement to the document linked above:

View attachment 495262
View attachment 495267

Either BT and JJJ failed to read the Edelman attachment to the defense motion or BT and the judge don't understand it. It is crystal clear, even to the most casual reader, that all questions came from information that was in the 3 newspapers cited and therefore outside of the gag order.

JMO.

It's one thing to ask a respondent if they have heard of the Moscow murder case, and if so, what have they heard. That is completely fair.

But that is not what the consultant did. The consultant proactively told the respondents what had been reported at various times in the media. If a respondent was not aware of those specifics before the call, they were when they hung up. That potential jury member has now been tainted by that consultants phone call. That's the issue. Multiply that by 400. How many would have been called eventually?

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776373241751449624

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776373848352739695

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776377389423227091

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776380924781113445

 

[Cool Cats]

I watched he seems rather restrained given the circumstances. Also, comments on "salvaging" survey work. Too late, sigh. JMOO

Well he is not happy.

Kohberger’s defense, led by public defender Anne Taylor, objected and argued that Judge’s decision to stop their community survey work before a court hearing violated Kohberger’s rights under the 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process.

Judge, heated at points, rejected the allegation.

“I am being accused – directly accused, OK? – by you in your brief, that I violated his due process rights,” Judge fired at Taylor. “Now, that’s not what the law says and that’s not what the facts are.”

Taylor acquiesced when challenged, but vented frustration over a legal process that did not allow the defense to continue its work ahead of a looming deadline later this month to file briefs justifying its position for a change of venue.

Judge in UI murder case rebukes Bryan Kohberger defense team for juror phone survey

The man charged with murder in the University of Idaho student homicides returned to court Thursday for a hearing over his defense paying a survey firm to contact potential jurors as his attorneys try to build arguments that an impartial jury is not possible in the county where the crime took place.

www.spokesman.com

 

[NCWatcher]

Edelman: "No Evidence of ... Impact" on Prospective Jurors.

Per Dr. Edelman's declaration, his survey concluded that media coverage caused bias in Latah residents, giving def. atty grounds to argue for Change of Venue.

Later in his declaration made under penalty of perjury, he basically dismissed the idea that his survey could have caused bias:
"The notion that polling 400 community residents (1% of the Latah County population 18, and over) is the cause of potential bias in a county that has been saturated with hundreds of highly prejudicial newspaper articles, television news stories, and social media posts is not credible...."
"There is no evidence that conducting the survey has had any impact on the master list of prospective jurors or potential venire in this case." *

HOW did Dr. Edelman reach his "no evidence of impact" CONCLUSION? The declaration cites no basis.

Not trying to be a smart aleck, but did Edelman or Research Strategies, Inc. conduct another survey later? A survey like the presumably well designed, professionally executed initial survey now at issue? Or search w a different method or tool?
Just wondering.

BTW, not criticizing or questioning Dr. Edelman, his experience or credentials, his company, etc. Wondering about that specific conclusion.

________________________________
* DECLARATION OF BRYAN EDELMAN
(e-number page 13, hard copy page 9)
Attachment to 03/26/24 Memo. in Support of Objection

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/2024/032624_Memorandum_in_Support_of_Objection_to_the_States_Motion_for_Order_Prohibiting_Contact_with_Prospective.pdf

I've only skimmed the report but it sounds like it's saying
1. There is evidence of bias in the sample of 400. That suggests there is bias in the county population.
2. There is no evidence the survey itself created additional bias in prospective jurors.

I agree one can't really rule out the potential biasing effects of the survey the way the researcher has tried to except to say there is no evidence. And that's true. (And I personally think his statement about individuals not creating bias the way countywide media stories do makes sense.) But as you point out, he didn't look for evidence.

Regardless, I'm not sure another survey (or any other method) can truly test a hypothesis about the effects of the survey. IF a 2nd survey were to show a new sample was more biased than the original 400, that could be because
A. The 1st survey caused more bias in the county due to original respondents talking widely across the county.
B. Other events related to the case caused more bias such as new stories or coverage of court hearings.
C. Events not related to the case but widely reported caused bias (such as another high-profile or local violent case occurring or a conviction in another violent local or high-profile case happening.)
D. It's a matter of sampling error. The two samples weren't actually equivalent.

IF a 2nd survey were to show no difference in the amount of bias, that could be because
A. The 1st survey had no biasing effect.
B. It's an issue of statistical power. If an effect was there but was small, a huge sample would be needed to show it.
MOO

 

[Gardenista]

Seems like AT has been taking lessons from the Delphi defense attorneys and it's not a good look. Also, she's not very good at thinking on her feet. Some of her statements were nonsensical.

 

[katydid23]

Judge affirms he did not interfere with BK's due process.

Hearing adjourned.

I can tell already that AT is going to get on my last nerve when this trial begins.

 

[al66pine]

@Cindizzi
Thx for posting those tweets w those survey questions.

Anyone know if there are more survey Q's available at other link?