4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #108

She probably knows her efforts are futile too, but she chose to be a criminal defense attorney, and is one of the few death penalty qualified attorneys in her area, so she is probably used to futility. I could not do her job, nor would I if I could, but in order for our justice system to work, I am glad that there are people like her. JMO
This.

And IMO it's how she can do the job. BK is the defendant in front of her but she's dedicated to defending The Man against unlawful search, seizure and stripping of liberties.

And that's good because our freedoms depend on it, and when BK loses his right to liberty, we can be confident that it won't be without just cause.

She's tried everything.

Pounding everything, and when that has failed her, there's nothing left to pound but the clock.

JMO
 
New stuff on the case summary (pretty much all sealed). Here's some highlights:

--The defense has filed a motion for a special investigation (Hippler offered that in regards to Dateline at the last hearing ), state has filed a response.

--Defendant's Objection to Release of Privileged and Confidential Work Product: now we know that the objection was from the defense.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2025-06-12 at 9.44.56 PM.webp
    Screen Shot 2025-06-12 at 9.44.56 PM.webp
    31.2 KB · Views: 3
Table I, which is appended at the end of the State's Opposition to Defendent's Motion to Continue, is quite interesting and contains two columns: "The Defendant's Cited Area of Inquiry Per the ABA Guidelines" and the "State's Response."

One of the many interesting things in the table: Although the Defense (and State) witness lists are sealed, Table I alone lists 35 distinct mitigation witnesses, each identified by their initials and often by their relationship to Kohberger. Of these 35, none match the individuals of individuals who knew Kohberger back in Pennsylvania and agreed to be interviewed early in the investigation by the Spokesman-Review in the article, Pennsylvania friends, neighbors recall Moscow homicide suspect Bryan Kohberger’s past.

The initials of four of the witnesses match those of his immediate family and are designated as family members, and listed amongst the former teachers were MB and KR, who I assume are Michelle Bolger and Katherine Ramsland.

IMOO
The thing about mitigation witnesses in a quadruple murder case is all they can hope to do is keep him out of the line of the firing squad. And that is a big thing, for sure.

But it would then end up being LWOP. He'd be locked up for the rest of his life. So I kind of don't care that much which way it goes for him. If his family and criminology teachers can say enough good things about him to keep him out of the line of fire, fine. *shrug.*
 
New stuff on the case summary (pretty much all sealed). Here's some highlights:

--The defense has filed a motion for a special investigation (Hippler offered that in regards to Dateline at the last hearing ), state has filed a response.

--Defendant's Objection to Release of Privileged and Confidential Work Product: now we know that the objection was from the defense.
Can sometime translate the title of that Objection-- are they objectioning to the release or are they objecting to being called out? Is it related to the Dateline "leaks"? Are they answering the State who wants to see their work and they don't want to show it?
 
Can sometime translate the title of that Objection-- are they objectioning to the release or are they objecting to being called out? Is it related to the Dateline "leaks"? Are they answering the State who wants to see their work and they don't want to show it?
Sound like it maybe refers to the work product doctrine.
"The Work Product Doctrine protects documents and other tangibles prepared by an attorney or their representative in anticipation of litigation from disclosure to third parties."

"The confidentiality rule, for example, applies not only to matters communicated in confidence by the client but also to all information relating to the representation, whatever its source. A lawyer may not disclose such information except as authorized or required by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law. See also Scope."

I suppose if she could prove anything in the Dateline episode was produced by the defense, it could be an objection to that release of information. Or it might be a general "You can't make me release these things"
 
Sound like it maybe refers to the work product doctrine.
"The Work Product Doctrine protects documents and other tangibles prepared by an attorney or their representative in anticipation of litigation from disclosure to third parties."

"The confidentiality rule, for example, applies not only to matters communicated in confidence by the client but also to all information relating to the representation, whatever its source. A lawyer may not disclose such information except as authorized or required by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law. See also Scope."
Do they not want to show their work?
 
At this point , you would think AT's efforts are futile but she keeps on going, she's a dang honey badger.

The honey badger (Mellivora capensis):

IMG_3008.webp
Source: Wikipedia

Known for its:
  • thick skin
  • strength
  • ferocious defensive abilities
  • intelligence
  • fearlessness
  • toughness
Well, at least BK won’t be able to argue ineffective assistance of counsel.

IMO
 
Have you ever woken with a crick in your neck that stayed stiff more than a couple hours, so you went online to some medical symptoms website that shall remain nameless, and after researching 'stiff neck' for a few minutes, you became convinced that you had contracted some rare dread disease, and your head was about to fall off? Okay, silly, I know, but you see what I am getting at. That is exactly what I see when I read that BK had yadda yadda when he was a kid, or he had undiagnosed this, or mis-diagnosed that, or he can't do this because of something that happened 25 years ago, or couldn't have done THAT, because of any number of reasons. I think AT long ago entered the realm of Ripley's Believe it or Not scenarios, to explain why her client could not have killed 4 innocent college students, and she thinks if she tells us enough times and ways, we may begin to believe it. Uhhh, no. JMO
Yes. And using the 'traumas of heroin addiction' as a high school student as some kind of an excuse is a big stretch. He was not a neglected orphan living on the streets. He had an intact middle class household and IMO, choosing heroin was a personal choice on his part---it was not a life circumstance that waylaid him.
 
I'm actually kind of interested in his 'traumas'. I want to know what supposedly led him to murder. I want to know how he got addicted to heroin in high school. Most kids that are experimenting start with milder drugs like pot. How did he get there? Was he so messed up that nothing else would give him relief from his weird thoughts? Was he having murderous thoughts then? None of it's an excuse of course.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
150
Guests online
477
Total visitors
627

Forum statistics

Threads
625,511
Messages
18,505,662
Members
240,813
Latest member
Pam McEwan
Back
Top