4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #79

[maconrich]

IMO, this is how (underlined by me):

"Idaho Criminal Rule 5.1. Preliminary Hearing; Probable Cause Finding; Discharge or Commitment of Defendant; Procedure

(a) Preliminary Hearing. Unless indicted by a grand jury, a defendant charged in a complaint with any felony is entitled to a preliminary hearing. If the defendant waives the preliminary hearing, the magistrate must immediately file a written order in the district court requiring the defendant to answer. If a waiver of preliminary hearing form is used, the waiver form must be the Supreme Court waiver of preliminary hearing form found in Appendix A of these rules. If the defendant does not waive the preliminary hearing, the magistrate must schedule a preliminary hearing within a reasonable time, but in any event not later than 14 days following the defendant's initial appearance if the defendant is in custody and no later than 21 days after the initial appearance if the defendant is not in custody. Time limits in this subsection may be extended with the consent of the defendant and on showing of good cause, taking into account the public interest and prompt disposition of criminal cases. In the absence of consent by the defendant, time limits may be extended only on a showing that extraordinary circumstances exist. Extraordinary circumstances include disqualification of the magistrate by the defendant pursuant to Rule 25."

I.C.R. 5.1. Preliminary Hearing - Probable Cause Hearing - Discharge or Commitment of Defendant - Procedure. | Supreme Court

Shouldn't the judge have stated that he had the right to a PH unless he was indited by a grand jury? It seems like a major detail to leave out...

 

[isabella88]

IMO, this is how (underlined by me):

"Idaho Criminal Rule 5.1. Preliminary Hearing; Probable Cause Finding; Discharge or Commitment of Defendant; Procedure

(a) Preliminary Hearing. Unless indicted by a grand jury, a defendant charged in a complaint with any felony is entitled to a preliminary hearing. If the defendant waives the preliminary hearing, the magistrate must immediately file a written order in the district court requiring the defendant to answer. If a waiver of preliminary hearing form is used, the waiver form must be the Supreme Court waiver of preliminary hearing form found in Appendix A of these rules. If the defendant does not waive the preliminary hearing, the magistrate must schedule a preliminary hearing within a reasonable time, but in any event not later than 14 days following the defendant's initial appearance if the defendant is in custody and no later than 21 days after the initial appearance if the defendant is not in custody. Time limits in this subsection may be extended with the consent of the defendant and on showing of good cause, taking into account the public interest and prompt disposition of criminal cases. In the absence of consent by the defendant, time limits may be extended only on a showing that extraordinary circumstances exist. Extraordinary circumstances include disqualification of the magistrate by the defendant pursuant to Rule 25."

I.C.R. 5.1. Preliminary Hearing - Probable Cause Hearing - Discharge or Commitment of Defendant - Procedure. | Supreme Court

Thank you! I still wonder though, since BK didn't waive his PH how can a secret grand jury swoop in and nullify that PH? Is it a matter of which happens first, grand jury indictment or PH? Meaning that if the grand jury acts before the date of the PH, then the PH is nullified?
SPELLING EDIT

 

[Warwick7]

I am a bit perplexed. I won't even address the Dad issue.
But you say that the Defendant wont have the opportunity to attack the evidence like that is a good thing? If the evidence can't hold up now it certainly wont at trial. This is why we have preliminary hearings. I just routinely stunned by comments like this.
The two survivors have been through a horrible ordeal. But at least the one had avoided PH testimony entirely. But regardless, if this case goes to trial, and I think there is a good chance it will, those girls are going to have to testify. And there may be some stuff that comes out that is uncomfortable for them. But before we sent a man to death row or life in prison, we have to hear the facts.

Yes, I totally agree they will have to testify. As for now I glad it spared the two as well as other potential witnesses from having to testify under cross-examination.
This has to be so horrendous for them.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Shouldn't the judge have stated that he had the right to a PH unless he was indited by a grand jury? It seems like a major detail to leave out...

Good point. I haven't read all the verbiage given at that time, but I would hazard a guess that it was "in there" and the State's rule is overarching and is known to all involved parties including the Defense, and it has been a known possibility all along. MOO

 

[maconrich]

Good point. I haven't read all the verbiage given at that time, but I would hazard a guess that it was "in there" and the State's rule is overarching and is known to all involved parties including the Defense, and it has been a known possibility all along. MOO

So what's in written documents has more (legal) meaning than what a judge says in court?
Edited: had to change some words around

 

[I'm Nobody]

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest

State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger​

Latah County CR29-22-2805

Case Summary (Updated 05/17/23)

• 05/11/2023 Notice of Remote Hearing
• 05/11/2023 Reply to Mr Kohbergers Objection
• 05/12/2023 States Response
• 05/12/2023 States Response
• 05/16/2023 Order Denying Motion to Reconsider
• 05/16/2023 Indictment (Redacted)
• 05/16/2023 Notice of Hearing Criminal
• 05/16/2023 Order Governing Courthouse and Courtroom Conduct
• 05/17/2023 Motion to Seal Grand Jury Witnesses
• 05/17/2023 Order to Seal Grand Jury Witnesses

Thank you @arielilane. From the above 5/16/ Order Governing Courthouse n Courtroom Conduct
Media will be allowed but no live streaming so as I read it coverage will be delayed. Even cellphones have to be off, no tweets either.

JMO.
Sorry if this was posted previously. A lot to digest today.

"No live broadcasting, transmitting, or streaming from the courtroom is allowed. No movement around the courtroom will be allowed during court proceedings. Camera and audio equipment shall not be set up nor disassembled at any time while court is in session."

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

I.C.R. 5.1. Preliminary Hearing - Probable Cause Hearing - Discharge or Commitment of Defendant - Procedure. | Supreme Court

isc.idaho.gov

Don't know if this helps. Again, I'm just giving my uneducated opinions and what makes some sense to me, IMO.

 

[Warwick7]

Thank you @arielilane. From the above 5/16/ Order Governing Courthouse n Courtroom Conduct
Media will be allowed but no live streaming so as I read it coverage will be delayed. Even cellphones have to be off, no tweets either.

JMO.
Sorry if this was posted previously. A lot to digest today.

"No live broadcasting, transmitting, or streaming from the courtroom is allowed. No movement around the courtroom will be allowed during court proceedings. Camera and audio equipment shall not be set up nor disassembled at any time while court is in session."

I think during Patrick Frazee's trial it was very similar. If a journalist left to send a tweet or what have you...they weren't let back in. I think...

 

[isabella88]

Thank you @arielilane. From the above 5/16/ Order Governing Courthouse n Courtroom Conduct
Media will be allowed but no live streaming so as I read it coverage will be delayed. Even cellphones have to be off, no tweets either.

JMO.
Sorry if this was posted previously. A lot to digest today.

"No live broadcasting, transmitting, or streaming from the courtroom is allowed. No movement around the courtroom will be allowed during court proceedings. Camera and audio equipment shall not be set up nor disassembled at any time while court is in session."

This is unfortunate. The taxpayers will pay for this trial and they deserve to see and hear what they pay for, IMO. It's dangerous to do the business of justice behind closed doors and also to leave it to the press to relay what happened to the public. All my opinion.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Yes. I'm concerned about any appeal issues. JMO

Well, I've read on law firm websites recently that it is extremely rare for an appeal to be won in the case of a Grand Jury indictment not being "fair", and that it's also somewhat rare, obviously, for it to happen in the first place but it depends on the circumstances of the case.

I haven't found anything similar about the right to a PH being unfairly superceded by a GJ indictment, because it's the law as written in the rules of the state that a defendant only has a right to a PH if a GJ does not indict.

I'm sure the State knows what they're doing and have no worries about this being a basis for an appeal, especially since the basis for a GJ was due to numerous circumstances of the case that were approved by the judge.

I guess it's water under the bridge anyway at this point and off they go to the races (apologies for so many euphemisms, it's been a long day - I was awake early this morning when the news first broke via NewsNation on twitter at "O dark hundred hours" )

MOO & IANAL

 

[cottonweaver]

Thank you @arielilane. From the above 5/16/ Order Governing Courthouse n Courtroom Conduct
Media will be allowed but no live streaming so as I read it coverage will be delayed. Even cellphones have to be off, no tweets either.

JMO.
Sorry if this was posted previously. A lot to digest today.

"No live broadcasting, transmitting, or streaming from the courtroom is allowed. No movement around the courtroom will be allowed during court proceedings. Camera and audio equipment shall not be set up nor disassembled at any time while court is in session."

Sounds like it could be like the Lori Vallow trial with state and Defense both agreeing

Audio only, late uploads of the audio. Following the trial by live tweets is very difficult and often the tweets are inaccurate but it's too laborious for trial followers to also then cross check against the audio the next day

 

[maconrich]

Dbm

Yes, thank you. IMO this is exactly what the judge should have stated in court: "(a) Preliminary Hearing. Unless indicted by a grand jury, a defendant charged in a complaint with any felony is entitled to a preliminary hearing."

Since the OP removed their post, here's the link:

I.C.R. 5.1. Preliminary Hearing - Probable Cause Hearing - Discharge or Commitment of Defendant - Procedure. | Supreme Court

isc.idaho.gov

 

[arielilane]

Thought this video helpful.

My thoughts are with the families of the young adults who were viciously murdered. One day justice will prevail for their loved ones!

 

[arielilane]

There is also a scheduling conference over the gag order on Monday, May 22.

 

[PrairieWind]

Quote

"it is the State that has still been unable to produce evidence now"

According to the prosecution they have given the defense everything required and have been clear that what they didn't turn over doesn't fall under any legal obligation to do so.

2 Cents

I believe the prosecution has acknowledged there is information that they have not yet produced. I think they were claiming they don't yet have it.

 

[arielilane]

BK made his initial appearance in court at the Latah County Courthouse in Moscow, ID on Thurs., January 5, 2023.

Accused Idaho Student Murderer Bryan Kohberger Appears in Court​

 

[Warwick7]

I believe the prosecution has acknowledged there is information that they have not yet produced. I think they were claiming they don't yet have it.

I haven't come across that yet.

 

[Warwick7]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658927069919846411

View attachment 422956

Oh dear......

 

[Warwick7]

What witness(es) would you think there are?

Are these any and all witnesses (like phone experts, forensic DNA specialists, etc.) or more like eye witnesses DH, etc?

I am curious too.

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658898540108845056