PLEA DEAL REACHED - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #109

[SteveP]

12 minutes

A quick run down of the Defense's latest motions DENIED

GH did make one important misstatement at the very beginning of this video. The judge did deny the motion to continue, but the trial will not begin on Aug 11. Jury selection is now scheduled to begin on Aug 4, instead of July 30, and will continue until a jury is seated, and it is estimated that the trial will actually commence, with opening statements, on Aug 18.

Hey, we have waited over 2 1/2 years for justice for Kaylee, Maddie, Xana, and Ethan. What is one more week? Justice is coming, soon!

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/062625+Amended+Scheduling+Order.pdf

 

[Izzylizzy]

Live in 3 hours
June 27 at 2:45 PM

 

[Sundog]

I think it’s hilarious that AT asked for a change of venue AND GOT IT and now is taking a beating at the gavel of our most favourite judge.

Judge Hippler says it as it is and has no problem letting Team Kohberger know it.

AT’s reputation is taking a beating.

I wonder if AT has history with Judge Hippler. She’s probably wishing she never asked for a change of venue.

Careful what you wish for!

MOO

I don't see it as AT's reputation taking a beating. As a defense attorney, her job is to try to save her client's life in a death penalty case and she is doing whatever she can to try to achieve that, including when she is working on the trial phase and the mitigation phase of the case - and she has to be doing both right now, simultaneously. I doubt she is worried about the judge's recriminations. She has a job to do and she's trying her best to do it. I doubt she is fazed by Hippler's wordsmithing, other than the decisions that are made on the motions. In addition, the defense and judicial officer in a death penalty case are presenting their motions and responses with the appellate court in mind. So there's a lot going on, including looking beyond both the trial and sentencing phases - right up to the appeal phase, given that this is a death penalty case.

JMO.

 

[wendy44]

BBM

This is the only part I disagree with. I understand and appreciate the importance of due process.

But is it really a defense attorney’s job to seek acquittal for every client?

Imagine a defense attorney has a client who is a serial child kidnapper, rapist and murderer. The evidence is overwhelming—bodies buried in his backyard, his semen in the vaginal tract of one recent victim found chained to his bed.

The defendant claims he is innocent, but the raped child, who isn’t dead yet, says he did it. Two days before, she saw him strangle her sister who was kidnapped with her, and her sister is one of the twenty children buried in his back yard.

Is it the defense attorney’s job to have her client found not guilty, to free him so he can repeat his crimes?

If the ABA really does require this of defense attorneys, if this is their code of “ethics,” I don’t find it ethical.

The goal of every attorney in the justice system should be to seek justice, fairness, and truth.

IMOO

It really is her job. She is supposed to work hard to seek acquittal so that the state has to work hard to prove their case. Especially in a death penalty case. The most important element in all of this is that the state proves their case beyond a reasonable doubt and we don't get that without a defense attorney who makes them do that.

AT crosses a line when she or her expert witnesses paint the prosecution as shady and the judge rightfully has lost patience with that. That is my only issue with her.
JMO

 

[Megnut]

GH did make one important misstatement at the very beginning of this video. The judge did deny the motion to continue, but the trial will not begin on Aug 11. Jury selection is now scheduled to begin on Aug 4, instead of July 30, and will continue until a jury is seated, and it is estimated that the trial will actually commence, with opening statements, on Aug 18.

Hey, we have waited over 2 1/2 years for justice for Kaylee, Maddie, Xana, and Ethan. What is one more week? Justice is coming, soon!

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/062625+Amended+Scheduling+Order.pdf

AT is probably kicking back today, celebrating her big win.

(I'm kicking back, celebrating her much bigger losses.)

jmo

 

[girlhasnoname]

BBM

This is the only part I disagree with. I understand and appreciate the importance of due process.

But is it really a defense attorney’s job to seek acquittal for every client?

Imagine a defense attorney has a client who is a serial child kidnapper, rapist and murderer. The evidence is overwhelming—bodies buried in his backyard, his semen in the vaginal tract of one recent victim found chained to his bed.

The defendant claims he is innocent, but the raped child, who isn’t dead yet, says he did it. Two days before, she saw him strangle her sister who was kidnapped with her, and her sister is one of the twenty children buried in his back yard.

Is it the defense attorney’s job to have her client found not guilty, to free him so he can repeat his crimes?

If the ABA really does require this of defense attorneys, if this is their code of “ethics,” I don’t find it ethical.

The goal of every attorney in the justice system should be to seek justice, fairness, and truth.

IMOO

I am only speaking of this case.

I have been convinced of BK's guilt from day one. He's going down with the strong evidence by the State. IMO

But...BK is entitled to a robust and competent Defense. That is a Constitutional Right of everyone in this Country. As long as AT stays within the boundaries of the law in her defense of BK, it is her job, emotions aside.

It is up to the Judge to make sure she stays within those boundaries. Judge (Hammer) Hippler has proven time and again that he has no problem in ensuring she does just that and tells us how and why in his glorious responses to her desperate mountains of motions. Footnotes especially, gotta love them.

JMO

 

[SteveP]

I respect all of your opinions here, but I have a bit of a different take on what AT's job is. It is her job to work hard to get the best possible outcome for BK. That could be an acquittal, but it could also be other things, including trying to negotiate plea deals, which she may have attempted, if she was allowed to, or mitigating sentencing. which we know she has been and will continue to prepare to do, as needed. It is her job to work hard to insure that BK's constitutional rights are upheld. It is her job to work hard to investigate, gather evidence, and develop a defense strategy. It is her job to work hard to challenge the state's claims, and to try to raise reasonable doubt, and to force the state to prove their case.

In a case like this, where there seems to be substantial evidence, including some overwhelming evidence of guilt, it is a lot to put on her plate, to say it is her job to try to get him acquitted. In this case, if she can keep him from going before the firing squad, I believe that she will have done her job well.

Also, not for nothing, but let us not forget, BK, himself, has never actually pled 'not guilty'. A not guilty plea was entered on his behalf, while he chose to stand silent. AT seems to be working a lot harder for BK's best outcome than he is. J MO

 

[QB2022]

I love that the state have clearly been meticulous in making sure they did this by the book for the victims. They have given no grounds for the suggestions of dishonesty or lacking integrity.

AT is doing her job, but I am glad she is not succeeding. A weaker judge may have been less confident and therefore act with more caution.

 

[mmeynstyn]

I respect all of your opinions here, but I have a bit of a different take on what AT's job is. It is her job to work hard to get the best outcome for her client. That MIGHT be an acquittal, but it could also be other things, including trying to negotiate plea deals, which she may have attempted, or mitigating sentencing. which we know she has been and will continue to prepare to do, as needed. It is her job to work hard to insure that her client's constitutional rights are upheld. It is her job to work hard to investigate, gather evidence, and develop a defense strategy. It is her job to work hard to challenge the state's claims, and to try to raise reasonable doubt, and to force the state to prove their case.

In a case like this, where there seems to be substantial, even overwhelming evidence of guilt, it is a lot to put on her plate, to say it is her job to get him acquitted. In this case, if she can keep him from going to the electric chair, I believe that she has done her job well.

Also, not for nothing, but let us not forget, BK, himself, has never pled 'not guilty'. JMO

I agree whole heartedly. She has been a pit bull for BK. I don't know how much BK has helped her. He may not care if he gets the DP for all I know, so may not be helping her at all. However, I am with those that think she has gone too far with the pointing fingers at the State and FBI to try to sway the media IMO. Also, she appears unorganized, and a bit scattered with all her complaining about ALL the discovery she had had to get through.

As a Public Defender, wow....she is the person everyone should want. Definitely no tax payer limit on what she will do for her client.

<eta: gosh, not sure what happened but I posted before completing my thought.>

 

[AcerPacer]

Dbm

 

[girlhasnoname]

I agree whole heartedly. She has been a pit bull for BK. I don't know how much BK has helped her. He may not care if he gets the DP for all I know, so may not be helping her at all. However, I am with those that think she has gone too far with the pointing fingers at the State and FBI to try to sway the media IMO. Also, she appears unorganized, and a bit scattered with all her complaining about ALL the discovery she had had to get through.

As a Public Defender, wow....she is the person everyone should want. Definitely no tax payer limit on what she will do for her client.

<eta: gosh, not sure what happened but I posted before completing my thought.>

I agree she went too far on insinuating misconduct by the State and on a few other things IMO. Hippler smacked her down on those and she deserved it.

I also agree that she is steadily looking more frazzled each time I see her. Gone are the early days of the fiercely put together, sleek looking, confident presenter she was in front of Judge Judge.

Judge Hippler is not a man to be trifled with. He has an excellent knowledge of the law and management of his Courtroom.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I respect all of your opinions here, but I have a bit of a different take on what AT's job is. It is her job to work hard to get the best possible outcome for BK. That could be an acquittal, but it could also be other things, including trying to negotiate plea deals, which she may have attempted, if she was allowed to, or mitigating sentencing. which we know she has been and will continue to prepare to do, as needed. It is her job to work hard to insure that BK's constitutional rights are upheld. It is her job to work hard to investigate, gather evidence, and develop a defense strategy. It is her job to work hard to challenge the state's claims, and to try to raise reasonable doubt, and to force the state to prove their case.

In a case like this, where there seems to be substantial evidence, including some overwhelming evidence of guilt, it is a lot to put on her plate, to say it is her job to try to get him acquitted. In this case, if she can keep him from going to the electric chair, I believe that she will have done her job well.

Also, not for nothing, but let us not forget, BK, himself, has never actually pled 'not guilty'. A not guilty plea was entered on his behalf, while he chose to stand silent. AT seems to be working a lot harder for BK's best outcome than he is. J MO

I'm so glad we can all have differing (even if slightly) ideas and can discuss them. You know I'm one of, and have always been, the biggest proponents of the State (Bill Thompson), their case and BK's guilt. I've never wavered from that since his arrest and as information has been released.

I can't even begin to imagine what the relationship is between BK and AT. I truly can't call whether he is super involved, vocal and annoying, or just a lump of coal. Does he want the DP in a twisted sense?

I think BK's ego is far too big to let some 'female attorney' decide what's best for him without any of his input, but who knows? No wonder she is looking more frazzled as the days go by.

I just want a GUILTY verdict and #Justice4KayleeMaddieXanaEthan. I believe it's coming.

JMO

 

[Arkay]

I absolutely agree that BK has the Constitutional right to a robust defense.

IMO though, AT is long past “robust” and is now in the territory of fairy tales, tilting at windmills, and running on fumes.

Yes, still doing her job, but there’s no “there there.” IMO as Not A Lawyer, she would better serve her client by immersing herself in whatever legitimate mitigation she can find.

I am sure by now she is exceedingly aware that Judge Hippler doesn’t play games and is not pleased with flimsy, gossamer, make-believe excuses to delay the trial.

If AT had anything of substance to exonerate Bryan, we would have heard it long ago.

JMO

 

[Magic8Ball]

I love that the state have clearly been meticulous in making sure they did this by the book for the victims. They have given no grounds for the suggestions of dishonesty or lacking integrity.

AT is doing her job, but I am glad she is not succeeding. A weaker judge may have been less confident and therefore act with more caution.

Judge Judge, the original judge in this case, was very much a weak sauce type, which is what empowered AT & Co. to think they could run the show. He did not carry any air of authority, and appeared unwilling to make a single decision and was instead content to play kick the can down the road at every hearing.

Judge Hippler put both sides on notice right from the very first hearing in his courtroom that the case was not going to continue to drag along at a snail's pace and without deadlines and parameters.

It's incredibly fortunate that this change of venue happened; otherwise, the case would have dragged on for years.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

It's always bothered me that innocent people, or the victims can be drug through the mud by a SODDI defense. They aren't the ones on trial.

No doubt one or more of the supposed alternate suspects have already been victimized by online speculation. I'm glad that the judge made it impossible for them to be damaged by the court trial.

 

[Megnut]

From the Land of Duh,

If BK was just driving around and not stopping (but going so slowly he looked parked) within 300', went didn't HE call in the DD vehicle? She called him in. And when LE was looking for Elantras, why didn't he call his in? I know it's not the right year, but I was over that way, driving and not stopping. I did see a woman over there, parked right next to me...

It's almost like BK didn't want anyone to know he was over there.

He and AT have that in common.

Doh.

JMO

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Hippler has a way with words.

Dude can write.

 

[Sachi]

Dude can write.

indeed

 

[jesse]

To say the defense was slinging mud at the wall in regards to their alternate perpetrator argument, is entirely appropriate. We knew it would be weak, but this is absolutely hilarious.

They pointed the finger at three people who knew one or more of the victims, and engaged with them socially in the hours before the murders.

It's DISGUSTING. It's disgusting to name and accuse people with zero evidence.

 

[Megnut]

Another 18 m video. More discussion about BK and his route.