The Moscow Murders and More

Prosecutors Blast Bryan Kohberger's Second Attempt To Stay Proceedings

The Kohbeberger legal team continues to attempt to get things to slow down in Moscow and so far they have come up with nothing for their efforts. Now, after the second request to stay proceedings in July, the prosecutors replied and its safe to say that they do not agree with team Kohberger's assesment.

(commercial at 8:08)

to contact me:

bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

soruce:

Idaho college killings prosecutors challenge defense's grand jury claims (msn.com)

Duration:: 12m
Broadcast on:: 31 Dec 2024
Audio Format:: other

What's up everyone and welcome back to the program. Brian Coburger's legal team has tried to get his stay in the proceedings because of the grand jury indictment that was handed down to him. Well, they have tried to use every play in the book to get the judge to go along with their request for this stay. However, the judge hasn't been convinced, although the judge did find their argument compelling enough to grant a 37 day stay when it comes to the information with the grand jury and the grand jurors and all of the stuff that was requested by Brian Coburger. Now, the prosecutors, well, they have responded to the allegations made by Brian Coburger and his team about the grand jury and what happened during the grand jury process. So, let's dive into this article from ABC News and let's get caught up. Headline, Idaho College killings prosecutors challenge defenses, grand jury claims. And I can't seem to find an author's name here to go along with this story, so we'll just call it ABC News Staff unless we stumble across the name later on in the article. Publishers in the case against murder suspect Brian Coburger said his defense team was trying to grind the litigation to a halt with flimsy arguments and attempting to buy more time to challenge his indictment. And what they're referring to is the new court filing made by the state that's challenging all of these assertions that Brian Coburger's team has made previously. That's attorneys for Coburger, a one time doctoral candidate accused of killing four college students last year, had asked for a stay by raising allegations of technical violations without ever explaining how any reach the substantial standard set forth. In Idaho's jury selection process statute, prosecutors wrote in a court filing released on Monday. Publishers said the reasons Coburger's defense team gave were outside the scope of the statutes or were a misreading of the statute. They added that Coburger has delivered on his promise strategy. He seeks a stay to buy more time to challenge the indictment in this case. And that certainly appears to be what his legal team is trying to do. But I think that if they went to the judge and asked for a delay in the case, given the amount of discovery, given the amount of information that they have to go through, I think that the judge would grant them that extension and would delay this trial. Now I know that the state doesn't want to do that and neither does the judge. But when you're talking about something as massive as this with so much evidence that's been compiled over the months, I would be absolutely shocked if this trial kicked off on October 2nd. There's just so much to go through here that I don't know how Brian Coburger's team could possibly even begin to get to the bottom of all of that discovery. Coburger's team in July requested for a second time that the case be paused, alleging an apparent failure in the grand jury process. Defense attorney Ann Taylor said without elaboration that other irregularity exists within the grand jury process and further investigation is necessary to determine the impact, if any, in the convening of this grand jury. So basically she's trying to plant the seed that there was a lot of irregularity here and that irregularity was prejudicial to a Brian Coburger. So because of that, the grand jury and its indictment should be null and void. That's basically what she's trying to present to the judge. In the judge, the first time around, told them to get stuffed and I have no doubt that this time around, it's going to be the same thing. Because there's no factual basis for what they're saying. There's only assertions and allegations. And of course remember Ann Taylor, like any good defense lawyer, is going to try and muddy the waters a little bit. If there's an air of impropriety around what's going on here, all the better for her and Brian Coburger in Monday's filing, the prosecution itemized and responded to the defense's claims of failure in the selection process. Coburger's team has not factually asserted a substantial failure to comply with the jury selection process. The prosecution said adding it has long been clear they were determined to get a stay even before they laid eyes on any of the grand jury materials that could back up their claims. So what the prosecutors are saying here is this was the plan all along from Brian Coburger and his legal team. No matter what that documentation showed, meaning the grand jury documentation, the plan was to challenge the grand jury indictment. And that's because what do we always talk about? That's right, loopholes and technicalities, folks, and get used to hearing that. You're going to be hearing a lot of that over in Rex Huerman's trial as well. Because when you don't have the facts on your side, all you have are loopholes and technicalities and the prayer that the prosecution steps out of line. So the judge just throws the whole entire thing out. But besides that, what sort of evidence is Brian Coburger going to provide to show us that he's not guilty here? Of course, the burden of proof is on the prosecution. What I'm talking about is if he's making these assertions, Brian Coburger, if his team's making these assertions, they have to make sure that they can back them up. And if they don't have proof to back up what they're saying, the judge isn't going to just give them a stay in the proceedings. Now, if they want to ask for a delay, I think they'll get that. But trying to do it this way, it's kind of ridiculous, honestly, and transparent. It's transparent as hell what they're trying to do. The defense had requested a pause in June before they had seen the grand jury materials that would form the basis of their challenge. That request was denied. Coburger is charged with the murders of four University of Idaho students, Ethan Chapin, Madison Morgan, Zanna Kernodle, and Kaylee Gonsalves. If convicted, he could face the death penalty. And we all know that the state of Idaho is certainly gunning for the death penalty. Prosecutors allege that in the early morning hours of November 13, 2022, Coburger, a criminology PhD student at nearby Washington State University, broke into an off-campus home and stabbed the four students to death. After a six-week hunt, police zeroed in on Coburger as the suspect, arresting him on December 30 of 2022 at his family's home in Pennsylvania. He was indicted in May and charged with four counts of first-degree murder and one count of burglary. At his arraignment, he declined to offer a plea so the judge entered a not guilty plea on his behalf. And one of the reasons that he stood silent was so that he could challenge this grand jury indictment that came down against him. A trial is scheduled for October 2, though a delay is likely. Well, it's about time that the legacy media started talking about how this is going to be delayed. I mean, I think it's only a formality at this point before we hear that this thing gets delayed and for all the reasons that I just stated previously. In Monday's filing, the Latah County prosecutor laid out parts of the grand jury process with which the defense had taken issue. Taylor had voice concerns in a sealed affidavit about individual juror bias or statements made by the court. During the selection process, the prosecution said, "The prosecution said Idaho's jury selection rule does not address those issues, so they would not work as basis for the defenses argument." Some of the questionnaires returned by potential jurors were missing certain numerical information at the top of the page, the defense attorney said, according to the prosecution. But that clerical information is not required by Idaho statute, the prosecution said. So they're saying that some of the jurors from the grand jury, that they didn't fill out the forms completely. They didn't mark a box, they didn't do this, they didn't do that. And they also said that one of the jurors marked that they don't speak English. But that's obviously not the case. And it was obviously an issue because that juror was able to participate in the proceeding. They were able to communicate with the foreman, they were able to communicate with the court, so they obviously understood English. If someone can't understand English, that indeed disqualifies them from sitting on a grand jury. However, the juror was presumably able to otherwise complete the questionnaire form, entirely in English, and to participate in the grand jury proceedings, the prosecution said, which shows a mistake stroke of the pen that merely checked the wrong box of a lengthy form, rather than a language barrier. And that's obviously what happened here. If somebody can't communicate in English, they're not going to be able to talk to the other members of the jury or to the judge, and the judge is going to recognize that, and it's going to be an issue. But none of that popped up. So it's obviously a clerical issue on this jurors behalf. On their questionnaire, one of the grand jurors disclosed that they were a prior criminal defendant, the prosecution rights of the defense's claims against the grand jury selection. According a prior criminal defendant does not preclude someone from sitting on a grand jury, the prosecution said, only those with a felony criminal conviction are disqualified. The defense took issue with another grand juror who did not mark where they were a prior criminal defendant and did not affirm that they were providing truthful responses on their questionnaire, according to Monday's filing. Coburger's team alleges that one of the grand jurors submitted an incomplete questionnaire and suggests that this somehow violated the act. The prosecution said, even if the jury commissioner had failed to conduct the ministerial task of sending the questionnaire out a second time, it still didn't rise to a level of a substantial failure to comply. With the statute, the prosecution said, Coburger's latest attempt for a stay is set for argument at a pretrial hearing this week, and that hearing slated for the 18th. The court should decline to indulge the defendant's already stated intention to buy more time to engage in various litigation strategies. The prosecution wrote, this motion, like is last, should be denied. So we'll see on the 18th what judge, judge has to say about all of this. But if past precedent has anything to tell us, then it's going to signal that judge judge is not going to grant this stay. And if they want a delay in the proceedings, they're going to have to ask for a delay. And we'll see what he has to say. But I highly doubt that judge judge would deny that request considering just the massive scope here. So we'll see what happens and we'll stay on top of things like usual. All right, everybody, that's going to do it for this one. All of the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.