4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 73

[DizzyB]

IMO this case has a couple of perculating legal issues. Just for some background, I was a full-time public defender handling thousands of clients and litigating hundred of cases and issues for the first 7 years of my practice.

1. Public Defenders

The toughest legal job there is and the lowest paying. Thankless work, but there are many outstanding PD's. Indigent defense is different in each state and federally there are full-time PD's and then panel attorneys who handle conflicts and other cases. In this matter, the attorneys handling the defense should be paid more than $200 an hour, but this just shows how indigent defense is a low budget priority, IMO.

2. COI

According to Ashley Banfield the prosecutor is not keen on the current attorney representing the defendant and the judge and defense attorney met in chambers with the judge declaring there is no conflict. However, neither the judge nor the attorney can waive a conflict. Only the impacted client(s) can waive a conflict. If the defendant wants to pursue a not me, some other person ("NMSOP") defense, the most logical avenue to explore is the drug angle and that goes to the victims and/or people near them. If some of the victims and/or their parents were involved in drugs, owed people money, or had been arrested and possibly snitched, these are all viable avenues for the defense to pursue and investigate. How do you do that if you are investigating your former client(s) for the exact thing you represented them for? This is where the potential conflict can arise.

Even if the defendant waived the conflict, he could still come back on appeal and say the waiver was not valid because it was coerced, etc.

Thus, IMO the potential conflict issue will always be there. In my old PD office these facts would have lead to the entire office conflicting out of the case from the get go.

3. Change of Venue

This is an obvious pre-trial motion in this case. Less than 40K people live in the county and over 60% of them live in Moscow. We live less than 400 miles away and over a moutain range, and people here were freaking out and locking windows, etc. It will be interesting to see what data the defense uses in their motion to support the change in venue. I think Ada County and Boise are obvious choices just because of population. Ada county is probably tired of the rural counties sending them their god awful murder cases. Change of venue is an exremely hard motion to win, even in small rural counties, so this will be a very interesting litigation issue.

4. Defense Strategy in Prelim

What evidence will the defense attack, if any, at preliminary? Will this hearing be used for discovery, plea negotiations or the first battle against the state's evidence? This will interesting to watch.

IMO

In your opinion, should the public defender have been benched as one of the only death penalty certified PDs in the area? It appears that she took X’s mom case after the murders. I would imagine that it came up pretty quick as to who her daughter was. I do feel like they knew this would be a death penalty case.

 

[SpanishInquisition]

As of Dec. 20, he was fired from his TA position, though. What did happen between the 20th & the 30th when he was arrested? Did he tell no one? Was he making plans to return to Pullman or not?

JMO

Assuming that leak was true, he still had the right to an appeal:
Assistantships may be terminated based on any other final orders as a result of a violation of the Standards of Conduct for Students. The termination of an assistantship is subject to appeal under the graduate student grievance procedures set forth in Chapter 12.E.3.

To appeal the findings or sanctions imposed by the Standards of Conduct for Students, the student must follow the appeal process outlined in the Standards of Conduct for Students.

Chapter Nine – G

Chapter 9G: Termination of an Assistantship 1. Non-renewal at the End of the Semester Assistantships are granted on a semester basis, unless specifically stated otherwise in a written letter of offer, and are renewed each semester at the discretion of the Graduate School and the department...

gradschool.wsu.edu

 

[CGray123]

You wrote "...neither the judge nor the attorney can waive a conflict. Only the impacted client(s) can waive a conflict." I may not understand your wording but doesn't there have to be a conflict for it to be waived? Are you saying the judge can't rule there is no conflict? Also there have been claims CK would have to waive for AT to represent BK. But AT is no longer CK's atty. So would she have to waive also?

I get your point about NMSOP. But aren't lots of criminal cases potentially related in a smaller town? Drug cases, receiving stolen property cases, petty theft and so on? Same sorts of relationship issues as CK and BK's cases?

JMO

With due respect to the very scrupulous OP attorneys who hold otherwise, there is no reason to believe that the judge or AT have "waived" any conflict. Even the headline about AT being "cleared" probably misrepresents both the purpose and the outcome of the meeting IMO.

The judge's only reason for meeting with AT after all the public comment about conflict of interest would have been to assess whether the proceedings were likely to be disrupted by AT's withdrawal as BK's counsel after investing substantial time and effort in the preparation of his defense. If the judge had heard from any source evidence of a concurrent conflict, she would have had a responsibility to report such information to those responsible for attorney discipline. The fact that AT remained on the case as BK's counsel after the meeting leads me to infer that the judge has no information that would support a conflict of interest or other ethical claim. (BTW, her knowledge includes all the information and claims we have seen and heard in the media).

If conflict of interest remains a percolating issue, I am not hearing any burbles from those who are in a position to know.

 

[Nova]

Freedom of the Press : (is not yelling FIRE in a movie theatre )

" Re-read the gag order. Judge Megan Marshall's gag order continues the gag through the whole trial.
'shall remain in full force and effect throughout the entirety of of this case...'

Understand pre-trial gag orders, but limiting outflow of facts during trial seems to create more wild speculation.
Who will that protect? Beginning to understand why the press is objecting.
jmo moo

The facts of the trial matter—i.e. whether there will be publicity and whether that publicity would actually prejudice the trial?"

imo moo

As another poster pointed out, a gag order on the trial principals will not prevent the press and other visitors from reporting the evidence presented during the trial.

All it will do is prevent those "on the courthouse steps" press conferences where the trial attorneys try to influence how the jury interprets what they heard that day. No big loss, if you ask me.

 

[WingsOverTX]

Assuming that leak was true, he still had the right to an appeal:
Assistantships may be terminated based on any other final orders as a result of a violation of the Standards of Conduct for Students. The termination of an assistantship is subject to appeal under the graduate student grievance procedures set forth in Chapter 12.E.3.

To appeal the findings or sanctions imposed by the Standards of Conduct for Students, the student must follow the appeal process outlined in the Standards of Conduct for Students.

Chapter Nine – G

Chapter 9G: Termination of an Assistantship 1. Non-renewal at the End of the Semester Assistantships are granted on a semester basis, unless specifically stated otherwise in a written letter of offer, and are renewed each semester at the discretion of the Graduate School and the department...

gradschool.wsu.edu

Somehow, I can't see an appeal by someone in conflict on the basis of accusations of unprofessional behavior going well.

And winning would also be a form of losing in my view. I can't see continuing in a PhD program where your 1st semester was a disaster. But that's JMO.

I'm sure WSU is very glad to have him as a former student.

I wonder if anything about his work there will come into evidence in the trial. Could those records already be in possession of the DA?

MOO

 

[WingsOverTX]

As another poster pointed out, a gag order on the trial principals will not prevent the press and other visitors from reporting the evidence presented during the trial.

All it will do is prevent those "on the courthouse steps" press conferences where the trial attorneys try to influence how the jury interprets what they heard that day. No big loss, if you ask me.

I hope you are right.

But assuming any news coverage from inside the courtroom is just that, an assumption. Journalists were only allowed pen & paper (no live tweeting, etc.) in proceedings during the Morphew case last year in Colorado.

Judges can basically shut the public out (no video), prevent smartphones from being in the courtroom (no live tweeting) & anything else they want to do as long as they give a legal reason.

A precedent has been set by one judge who feels comfortable doubling down on her original gag order.

For those who will research & quote ID law re: public access, let us remember the judge is the ultimate arbiter & opposition to their decisions is unlikely to have enough immediate effect to make a difference should the media try to do so.

JMHO

 

[Nova]

The PDs office defends the accused. In my view they defend who comes to their door, all that wish to plead not guilty whom and those who plead guilty plea they help negotiate so unlike punishment doesn’t get handed down.

CK was in the same legal
category as BK, an accused of a crime and needing state assistance to defend.

Personally, I see no COI. She happened to have been assigned PD that had advanced DP credentials. this wound up meaning her attorney was assigned to take another case
in line with those credentials.

Public defenders serve the citizens of the state by making sure the state’s prosecutors cannot try and convict without resistance, as happens in a sham or mock court, usually in dictatorships such as Russia or Iran.

MOO don’t think the relationship between an individual defendant and a PD supersedes the purpose of public defenders or is a conflict unless the two cases or the accused themselves are connected. A little sad but the whole situation is sad.

As others have suggested, however and for example, what if AT has knowledge of a prior client's drug use--or knowledge of a victim's drug use that AT got from that prior client--that might affect AT's ability to claim the murders were the result of a drug deal gone awry?

Attorney/client privilege might prevent AT from revealing what she knows, and that would accrue to the disadvantage of BK.

THIS IS ALL HYPOTHETICAL. I have no knowledge of illegal conduct on the part of any of the victims, nor do I know anything specific about the charges against their parents.

I'M ALSO NOT WORRIED. I feel confident that AT, her office, the trial judge, etc., have looked at any potential COI issues and made adjustments accordingly.

 

[steeltowngirl]

I'm sure WSU is very glad to have him as a former student.

Oddly, he still shows up on the WSU directory.
Guess they have not fully scrubbed him out yet.

And the phone number ending in 5889 is a PA area code phone line, a different number than the 8458 number listed in the PCA.
Hope LE looked at those phone records too.

Search Washington State University

search.wsu.edu

 

[Nova]

I hope you are right.

But assuming any news coverage from inside the courtroom is just that, an assumption. Journalists were only allowed pen & paper (no live tweeting, etc.) in proceedings during the Morphew case last year in Colorado.

Judges can basically shut the public out (no video), prevent smartphones from being in the courtroom (no live tweeting) & anything else they want to do as long as they give a legal reason.

A precedent has been set by one judge who feels comfortable doubling down on her original gag order.

For those who will research & quote ID law re: public access, let us remember the judge is the ultimate arbiter & opposition to their decisions is unlikely to have enough immediate effect to make a difference should the media try to do so.

JMHO

Reporters covered trials with nothing but pencil and paper for hundreds of years.

I think they can do it again.

Frankly, I don't see the loss in a ban on "live tweeting". Take away the "race to be first" and let reporters think for a few minutes about what they plan to report.

 

[WingsOverTX]

Reporters covered trials with nothing but pencil and paper for hundreds of years.

I think they can do it again.

Frankly, I don't see the loss in a ban on "live tweeting". Take away the "race to be first" and let reporters think for a few minutes about what they plan to report.

Well, even when I was a reporter in the 80s I had no shorthand training (unlike the two older reporters I worked with).

Yes, it can be done. Perhaps not efficaciously but sure 'nuff.

Why we would think that is adequate in the 21st century with so much tech at our disposable is not for me to defend!

Trial coverage by tweet stinks (but then, I'm biased because everything about Twitter annoys me!).

JMO

 

[CGray123]

If the defendant wants to pursue a not me, some other person ("NMSOP") defense, the most logical avenue to explore is the drug angle and that goes to the victims and/or people near them. If some of the victims and/or their parents were involved in drugs, owed people money, or had been arrested and possibly snitched, these are all viable avenues for the defense to pursue and investigate. How do you do that if you are investigating your former client(s) for the exact thing you represented them for?

RSBM, RBBM.

To me, the bolded statement is a form of "begging the question" - it assumes your conclusion instead of supporting it.

IMO, AT (or rather, her investigator) will ask all the questions he or she would ordinarily ask of a potential witness like CK. AT would not have to divulge CK's confidences or avoid any issues in order to supervise a thorough investigation into whether one of CK's associates was involved in the death of her daughter. Nearly all of these questions would have been asked already by LE detectives, and the PD investigator will use the police reports to check out her answers before he interviews her. Nothing about AT's former relationship with CK would cause her to direct the investigator to avoid any line of inquiry that results. IMO

In addition, IMO, it seems at least somewhat likely there were few - if any - confidences shared by CK. She was arrested November 19, 2022, and BK was arrested about seven weeks later, on December 30, 2022. Two major holidays happened during that period, with the impact you might expect on scheduling court hearings and appearances. I wonder just how much conversation about CK's life - if any - took place between attorney AT and client CK before the state public defender system asked AT to represent BK.

There was probably a conversation between AT and the prosecutor before AT even met her client. And I expect that the DA would not be inclined to engage in hard plea bargaining with the mother of a recent murder victim who happened to be a virtually helpless drug addict. A lenient plea agreement and a PR bond was probably on the table right away, giving the parties flexibility in scheduling (or waiving) the preliminary hearing, discovery, and other deadlines. The only scheduled hearing after the advisement may have been a disposition date for entry of the plea agreement on the record.

Given the circumstances, It is at least possible for me to believe there was no privileged discussion about threatening people in CK's life let alone her daughter's. AT simply didn't need to know much about those things to get a very advantageous deal for her client.

If there are duties AT owes a former client other than protection of confidences that might give rise to a conflict in her representation of BK, no one has identified them and they haven't been discussed anywhere.

 

[Cool Cats]

As of Dec. 20, he was fired from his TA position, though. What did happen between the 20th & the 30th when he was arrested? Did he tell no one? Was he making plans to return to Pullman or not?

JMO

1.) WSU Final Examinations begin on Monday, December 12, 2022 to Friday, December 16, 2022.

2.) December 13, 2022 - BK and his dad leave Pullman and start their drive to Pennsylvania.

3.) December 15, 2022 - On the drive to Pennsylvania BK is stopped by the Indiana State Police.

4.) December 19, 2022 - BK is fired from his TA position.

5.) Dec. 27, 2022 - Agents recovered items from the Kohbergers’ garbage bins and the bags they saw him put into the neighbors’ bins.

6.) December 29, 2022 - The Search Warrant Application to search BK's Pullman apartment is filed in Washington’s Superior Court.

7.) December 30, 2022 - BK is arrested at his home in Pennsylvania.

I do believe BK was planning to go back to Pullman because when his Pullman apartment was searched it was full of his belongings.

I think he needed to get his car out of Washington State due to the image of his "murder car" being plastered all over TV and the internet.

 

[WingsOverTX]

1.) WSU Final Examinations begin on Monday, December 12, 2022 to Friday, December 16, 2022.

2.) December 13, 2022 - BK and his dad leave Pullman and start their drive to Pennsylvania.

3.) December 15, 2022 - On the drive to Pennsylvania BK is stopped by the Indiana State Police.

4.) December 19, 2022 - BK is fired from his TA position.

5.) Dec. 27, 2022 - Agents recovered items from the Kohbergers’ garbage bins and the bags they saw him put into the neighbors’ bins.

6.) December 29, 2022 - The Search Warrant Application to search BK's Pullman apartment is filed in Washington’s Superior Court.

7.) December 30, 2022 - BK is arrested at his home in Pennsylvania.

I do believe BK was planning to go back to Pullman because when his Pullman apartment was searched it was full of his belongings.

I think he needed to get his car out of Washington State due to the image of his "murder car" being plastered all over TV and the internet.

Thanks for the timeline clarification.

To me, there is no "evidence" of planning to go back. Do we have any inventory of what he left behind that he couldn't easily replace? I doubt he even owned any furniture, etc., of great value.

Also, why would a person like BK remain in an environment where he would likely depend on the very people who have summarily rejected him. It seems to me that he had an avoidance pattern when called out for his behavior.

Wouldn't he have had a funding issue as well? I doubt they would be eager to have him as an RA.

It really doesn't matter which scenario one believes now, I guess. I just can't see him finding a way to continue in such a small doctoral program.

JMO

 

[Sundog]

Somehow, I can't see an appeal by someone in conflict on the basis of accusations of unprofessional behavior going well.

And winning would also be a form of losing in my view. I can't see continuing in a PhD program where your 1st semester was a disaster. But that's JMO.

I'm sure WSU is very glad to have him as a former student.

I wonder if anything about his work there will come into evidence in the trial. Could those records already be in possession of the DA?

MOO

If the DA has any of BK's academic work in his possession, he would have had to get a search warrant with reason to believe some specific academic documents are related to the murders, they wouldn't be able to just go fishing. The university would have to follow FERPA regulations of the federal government on student records and work.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

I hope you are right.

But assuming any news coverage from inside the courtroom is just that, an assumption. Journalists were only allowed pen & paper (no live tweeting, etc.) in proceedings during the Morphew case last year in Colorado.

Judges can basically shut the public out (no video), prevent smartphones from being in the courtroom (no live tweeting) & anything else they want to do as long as they give a legal reason.

A precedent has been set by one judge who feels comfortable doubling down on her original gag order.

For those who will research & quote ID law re: public access, let us remember the judge is the ultimate arbiter & opposition to their decisions is unlikely to have enough immediate effect to make a difference should the media try to do so.

JMHO

Trials are a matter of public record though. No judge can change that. I guess I'm not understanding the significance of no video in the courtroom. We'll all still find out what happened and we'll also be able to read about it afterwards. JMO.

 

[Sundog]

Thanks for the timeline clarification.

To me, there is no "evidence" of planning to go back. Do we have any inventory of what he left behind that he couldn't easily replace? I doubt he even owned any furniture, etc., of great value.

Also, why would a person like BK remain in an environment where he would likely depend on the very people who have summarily rejected him. It seems to me that he had an avoidance pattern when called out for his behavior.

Wouldn't he have had a funding issue as well? I doubt they would be eager to have him as an RA.

It really doesn't matter which scenario one believes now, I guess. I just can't see him finding a way to continue in such a small doctoral program.

JMO

The only personal item that I wonder about that BK left behind is his computer. He could have put that in the trunk of his car and told his father that he needed it, along with his laptop, to do some academic work during the winter break while he would be in PA. His father would have thought nothing of it. I agree that BK could have left behind other items like clothes, linens, furniture items acquired for the apartment, dishes, etc. All that could be easily be replaced.

 

[Cool Cats]

Thanks for the timeline clarification.

To me, there is no "evidence" of planning to go back. Do we have any inventory of what he left behind that he couldn't easily replace? I doubt he even owned any furniture, etc., of great value.

Also, why would a person like BK remain in an environment where he would likely depend on the very people who have summarily rejected him. It seems to me that he had an avoidance pattern when called out for his behavior.

Wouldn't he have had a funding issue as well? I doubt they would be eager to have him as an RA.

It really doesn't matter which scenario one believes now, I guess. I just can't see him finding a way to continue in such a small doctoral program.

JMO

After securing a search warrant for Kohberger's residence, police seized multiple items in the investigation. The items seized are:

1. One nitrite type black glove
2. Walmart receipt with one Dickies tag
3. Marshalls receipt
4. Dust container from vacuum
5. 8 possible hair strands
6. 1 "Fire TV" stick with cord and plug
7. 1 possible animal hair strand
8. multiple different hairs
9. computer tower
10. 1 collection of dark red spot
11. 2 cuttings from uncased pillow of reddish/brown stain (larger stain tested)
12. 2 top and bottom of mattress cover packaged separately with multiple stains

It is possible he wasn't planning to come back but also possible that he was planning to come back because when he left he was still a TA.

Or both could be true.

He was a TA when he left and could have planned to come back and continue in that position. But then when he got notice that he wasn't a TA any longer, he could have decided - at that time - not to go back.

Ironically, he is now back in the area, but not as a TA!

Items seized from Kohberger's apartment include glove and stained sheets

New information has been released in the case of four murdered University of Idaho Students. The search warrants used to search Bryan Kohberger's home and offic

idahonews.com

 

[Auntie Cipation]

The only personal item that I wonder about that BK left behind is his computer. He could have put that in the trunk of his car and told his father that he needed it, along with his laptop, to do some academic work during the winter break while he would be in PA. His father would have thought nothing of it. I agree that BK could have left behind other items like clothes, linens, furniture items acquired for the apartment, dishes, etc. All that could be easily be replaced.

What about his lease? Was it on-campus housing? He would be obligated to keep paying rent unless he told the landlord he was leaving and worked out an agreement to break the lease. Certainly the landlord, even if the university, wouldn't look kindly on an apartment being abandoned with personal belongings inside.

My guess is that at the time he drove east, he thought he would return. He knew he wasn't doing well as a TA, but he possibly thought that would stabilize and he would be able to continue toward his PhD. Presumably he thought he had gotten away with the murders, and beyond that he might well have been open to "winging it" in terms of his studies.

Then, once he was fired while back in PA, we don't know how that changed his plans or indeed whether he even told his parents he'd been fired. Maybe he was hiding that from them and planned to return to Pullman after the holidays (with a different car), and either find a way to keep on with the PhD program, or maybe to then meander away from WSU or from Pullman entirely, taking his belongings with him at that time.

MOO

By way of anecdotal example, when I was kicked out of university for failing to keep my grades up, I didn't go home to my parents. I moved to San Francisco where I worked for two years before eventually returning to school and getting my degree.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

What about his lease? Was it on-campus housing? He would be obligated to keep paying rent unless he told the landlord he was leaving and worked out an agreement to break the lease. Certainly the landlord, even if the university, wouldn't look kindly on an apartment being abandoned with personal belongings inside.

My guess is that at the time he drove east, he thought he would return. He knew he wasn't doing well as a TA, but he possibly thought that would stabilize and he would be able to continue toward his PhD. Presumably he thought he had gotten away with the murders, and beyond that he might well have been open to "winging it" in terms of his studies.

Then, once he was fired while back in PA, we don't know how that changed his plans or indeed whether he even told his parents he'd been fired. Maybe he was hiding that from them and planned to return to Pullman after the holidays (with a different car), and either find a way to keep on with the PhD program, or maybe to then meander away from WSU or from Pullman entirely, taking his belongings with him at that time.

MOO

By way of anecdotal example, when I was kicked out of university for failing to keep my grades up, I didn't go home to my parents. I moved to San Francisco where I worked for two tears before eventually returning to school and getting my degree.

I agree with this. As far as I know, there's been no evidence that he wasn't planning to come back. He wasn't fired yet, he still had his studies. I don't find it weird that he left his apartment as it was. I think he was definitely planning to come back.

JMO.

 

[Cool Cats]

If the DA has any of BK's academic work in his possession, he would have had to get a search warrant with reason to believe some specific academic documents are related to the murders, they wouldn't be able to just go fishing. The university would have to follow FERPA regulations of the federal government on student records and work.

The search warrant for his office is extremely detailed. No surprise if some of his digital work related materials were confiscated along with other digital evidence such as images, passwords, files, hard drives, thumb drive, data storage devices, etc.

Investigators cannot determine how relevant the computer evidence is until they have a chance to analyze it. Thus, it is likely some of his digital work related materials were seized.

Contributed by Law&Crime (Law&Crime) Law & Crime - Law and Crime News

Kohberger warrant

www.documentcloud.org

Kohberger's WSU Office Warrant:​