I'll agree that I don't think Dateline should have put out an episode on the case with information that was definitely covered by the gag order just a few months before before trial.
I disagree with the hosts both thinking that the info could only have come from someone low level in local LE/prosecution and that the people on the episode speaking provided none of it. I think it came from multiple places, probably from both "sides"--heck, even moving the trial from Moscow to Ada County increased the number of people with access to information. Howard Blum, Steve G and his PI, the numerous experts and consultants on both sides, one of the multiple residents of the next door house with the security footage, friends of BK's office mate, etc--so many sources.
What I would like to know, in addition to who, is the when---not in terms of "oh, Dateline got that info b4 the gag order and held onto it this whole time"....but when did they get each piece of evidence in relation to where the case was at certain times in terms of different appeals and judgements.
Now, mini-rant on:
I'll nitpick here--I'm disappointed that it sure seems like JSM and his cohost didn't bother to do a lot of verifying of facts/dates against what they recalled before they recorded and published this episode. I started taking notes of things they were factually wrong about or uninformed about...things that would have taken them seconds on Google to check instead of saying "well, if I remember correctly" or flat out stating something as fact or things that they'd know if they'd read court filings. If you are a well known podcast, stating in the episode that you've followed the case closely since the beginning, I feel you have a responsibility to do your research and fact checking before recording an episode. It's not like he rushed to put this out right after the Dateline episode aired--that was nearly a month ago. And there was no pressing need for this episode to be dropped this week...so, take your time and check your work.
Just off the top of my head--and yes, I went and double checked to be sure (for those who also listened):
--The mattresses weren't just plopped bare in the back of the pickup trucks--they were encased in white bags. Unfortunately, the bag material wasn't very opaque and the bloodstains were visible. Do I wish they had put them in an enclosed truck? Sure. But despite what JSM says, they were not exposed to the elements--they were encased. In two seconds you can find a photo of them and look and see.
--JSM and cohost question whether the times on the security cameras, etc were accurate-
filing from 3/17 pg 28--it goes through and details the accuracy or inaccuracy (and amount) of the timing of each video camera.
--the part about AT being XK's mom's former lawyer and whether that was ok. JSM even said he didn't know if any family had objected to that. And yes, it was in the news because XK's mom had gone on Newsnation and said it was wrong--that's pretty much why that was in the public's mind. Heavens knows I'm no fan of AT, but that was gone over in court on 1/27/2023 with Judge Marshall, explained, and Ashley Jennings/BT agreed with the judge and the Idaho Bar that AT had not met the mom . The reason her name was over the actual representing lawyer when the cases were active because she was head of the county's public defender office--that was the situation for one of the mom's cases. In the other case, the lawyer from the public defender's office who had repped the mom had left the office, so the case was reassigned to AT on Oct 20, 2022 (the case had already been sentenced), and they were waiting to be official withdrawn from the case. In the meantime, she had no contact with the mom nor offered her any legal advice (again no need for her to do so, the mom had already been sentenced when it was transferred over to her officially pending withdrawal).This was covered in early March of 2023 by Brian Entin and many others (BE even provides a transcript of that hearing):
If JSM and cohost mean their show to be just a chat about things instead of actual coverage and analysis of topics based on JSM's expertise, then no problem. But that's not the impression I had of what they consider their show to be.