Beyond The Horizon

ICYMI: Why The Surveys In Moscow Could Be A Gamble For Kohberger

Bryan Kohberger and his legal team were granted the right to continue with their survey in Idaho in hopes of securing a change of venue for the trial. However, there are many pitfalls that come with this strategy.

In this episode we dive into the gamble by Kohberger and breakdown what it might mean for his overall strategy moving forward.

A survey used by lawyers to request a change of venue could backfire in several ways:

Bias in Survey Sampling: If the survey is conducted among a biased or non-representative sample of the population, it could be challenged by the opposing party as being unfair or manipulated.
Public Perception: If the survey becomes public knowledge, it could sway public opinion against the lawyers' desired venue change. For example, if the survey is perceived as biased or manipulative, it could lead to negative publicity for the legal team.
Opposing Counsel's Strategy: The opposing counsel could use the survey results to their advantage by arguing against the change of venue. They might question the validity of the survey methodology or present counter-evidence to refute its findings.
Court's Scrutiny: The judge overseeing the case may scrutinize the survey methodology and findings, especially if there are doubts about its fairness or accuracy. If the survey is deemed unreliable or biased, it could weaken the lawyers' argument for a change of venue.
Prejudicing the Court: If the survey results are presented in a way that seems manipulative or designed to prejudice the court, it could backfire by undermining the lawyers' credibility and damaging their case.
Legal Precedent: If the use of surveys for change of venue requests becomes a contentious issue in the case, it could set a precedent that affects future legal proceedings, potentially limiting the use of surveys in similar circumstances.
Unintended Consequences: Sometimes, survey results can have unintended consequences or reveal information that was not anticipated. This could lead to unforeseen challenges or complications in the legal strategy.

(commercial at 8:03)

to contact me:

bobbyccapucci@protonmail.com

source:

Bryan Kohberger's Lawyer Is Betting on 'Strategic' Move (newsweek.com)

Duration:: 11m
Broadcast on:: 04 Jul 2024
Audio Format:: mp3

(upbeat music) (upbeat music) - What's up everyone and welcome back to the program. In this episode, we're heading back out to Idaho to check in on Brian Coburger and what's going on with his trial. Recently, we heard from the judge that the surveys are going to be allowed to continue. And I know that there's a lot of people out there that aren't a big fan of that move, but I think that judge judge is thinking about the long game here. And what I mean by that is that later on down the road, Brian Coburger can't complain that he wasn't given every single chance to show the jury that he is not the man that the state says he is. And I think a lot of what judge judge is doing is just making sure that later on down the road, we don't have any issues. This has already been a lengthy ass process. Can you imagine if it goes to trial, Brian Coburger gets convicted and then there's some issue later on down the road where he appeals it and ends up with a new trial? That's the last thing that anybody wants. So it might take a little bit of time to get to the point where justice is served, but if there is games being played by the prosecution or if there's any sort of issue, when it comes to Brian Coburger not getting a fair shake, the clock's gonna start all the way over at zero again. And I don't think anybody wants to get to that point. Besides maybe Brian Coburger, today's article is from Newsweek and the headline. Brian Coburger's lawyer is betting on a strategic move. The author of this article is Matthew and Pelly. Lawyers for quadruple homicide suspect Brian Coburger are betting on a strategic move in the case, a judge said last week. On Friday, Judge John Judge, who is overseeing the case, responded to survey questions from the defense to potential jurors calling them a strategic decision. The goal of the non dissemination order is to ensure a fair and impartial jury can be impaneled so that the defendant receives a fair trial. The judge said if defense counsel believes asking these survey questions, which arguably contain prejudicial information or misinformation about the defendant is more beneficial than harmful. As defendants, expert testified, this court does not at this juncture, have sufficient information or evidence to second guess that strategic decision by trial counsel. So basically what judges say in here is, this is a very, very risky proposition. And the fact that they're willing to put out this information that is prejudicial to Brian Coburger, no doubt about it, it tells you just how perilous their position is. They don't have very much to work with folks and they're trying their best gear, you know, they're punching up and they're trying to grab on to whatever the debris is floating by, but it's not working out so well. And I think that we're headed for a situation here, like we saw with Alec Murdoch down in South Carolina, where Brian Coburger just gets absolutely blown out of the water when we're talking about the battle of the experts. The remarks by the judge came shortly after Coburger's lawyer and Taylor said the survey results of the potential jurors showed that the jury pool in Laetau County, Idaho was biased and I'm not gonna go off on a long tangent about jury pools and tainting of jury pools, et cetera these days, but I think it's all overblown. And if you can get a jury for Donald Trump, don't tell me you can't get a jury for anybody else, I don't wanna hear it. Coburger 29 has been charged with four counts of first-degree murder and one count of felony burglary in connection with the fatal stabbings of Kalegan Solvis, Madison Morgan, Zanna Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin. The four University of Idaho students were found dead in an off-campus home on November 13th, 2022, at 1122 King Road, Moscow, Idaho. Coburger has maintained his innocence and his legal team has continued to seek to have the trial moved out of Laetau County. The survey questions were previously criticized by Judge and Laetau County prosecutor, Bill Thompson. You know, like I said before, if they wanna take this path and all the risks that come along with it, then hey, go for it. But I don't think any survey in the world is going to change what people think. And once you get into the courtroom and all of the evidence comes piling in, all the bullshit goes out the window and the time for talk is over, right? Now it's time to put up, it's time to show evidence, it's time to back up all of those court documents, all those filings, and it's certainly time to back up your alibi. And when it comes to Brian Coburger, he can't back up any of it. Oh sure, him and his lawyers can talk about this, that or the other thing, all sounds good when you're filing it. But now that you're in front of the jurors, how are you going to explain the third party theory? How are you going to say that it was somebody else? There's no evidence of that. So you can't just show up in court and say, well, it wasn't me, it was Tom Dick or Harry and not have any sort of evidence. Now, of course, the burden of proof is on the state, but that doesn't mean that if you show up as a defendant, you can just pop off and yeah, more than six barbers and not have any evidence to back it up. This was a total shock to me. Judge Tall Taylor, because this is a big deal and I take it very, very seriously. And I was surprised, okay, that this was happening behind our backs, behind my back. Yeah, judges aren't big fans of you springing things on them. They like to know what the deal is, right? They like to know what's going on. They want to be aware of what's coming down the pipe. And if you have a filing that you're going to make, they want to know about it. So this was all a surprise to the judge and that's why Judge Judge admonished them. It wasn't the survey so much. It was the fact that it was a surprise. Thompson told the judge that this survey cannot stand saying that potential jurors were injected with information. Well, that's true. But I think that it's a conscious decision on the behalf of Brian Coburger and his team. So that alleviates any worries of later on, him saying, well, I wasn't represented correctly or I didn't have the right advice. It kills all of that. It's his team that's asking for it. So as things progress later on, Brian Coburger can't come back with any BS. Whereas if judge didn't let him do this and he denied the survey, Brian Coburger could come back possibly later on and say that he wasn't given a fair trial. Michael McAuliffe, a former federal prosecutor, told Newsweek on Tuesday that the judge's order allowing the survey to stand shows that the presiding judge in the Coburger case was influenced by the fact that both parties discussed the challenge questions in multiple public hearings. And once it became public in the public hearings, well, the gag order doesn't stand anymore. Once it hits the docket, it's no longer considered under gag. The only things that are under gag are things that haven't been made public and things that haven't been discussed in open court. Another critical component of the court's reasoning and permitting the survey questions to continue being asked in several counties is that the defense is the party asking the questions that contain incriminating information and arguably prejudicial facts. The judge refers to the defense council's choice as strategic McAuliffe says, "Oh, there's no doubt, loopholes and technicalities. "You already know." When you don't have the evidence on your side, that's all you really have at your disposal. And Brian Coburger and his team, they understand what they're up against, they understand the amount of evidence that has been put before them, and they understand that it's going to be a monumental task to beat that evidence in court. So in their mind, this gamble is worth it. They don't really have much to lose, remember. They're playing from behind, so if they can catch lightning in a bottle maybe, with the risk of perhaps tainting the jury pool that they believe is already tainted, in their minds, it's certainly worth the shot. Is it gonna pay off in spades later on down the road? I highly doubt it, but there's not too many paths for Brian Coburger and his team to travel down here. One way to interpret that reference is the court is protecting the record against future allegations of ineffective assistance of council. It also makes it much less likely that the survey results could support a change of any request as it is a defendant who is using potentially prejudicial information in a way that's public. And really, it shows you where they think they're at. When they're willing to take a risk like this, it shows you that they know that the case against them is strong. So they're going to have to really work over time to come up with something that throws a wrench in the situation for the prosecution. And when you don't have the evidence on your side, and remember, we don't know everything that the prosecution has. All we have seen so far is a small portion of it. So once we get a little bit further along in the process and we start to see things getting unsealed, we're gonna have a better idea of just how strong this evidence is. Coburger's defense team also recently released information about a possible alibi and said that they planned to call Cy Ray, a former police officer who specializes in analyzing cell phone data in criminal cases as a defense witness. Ray will testify that Brian Coburger's mobile device was out the Pullman, Washington, and west of Moscow, Idaho on November 13th, 2022. That Brian Coburger's mobile device did not travel east on the Moscow Pullman Highway in the early morning hours of November 13th. And thus could not be the vehicle captured on video along the Moscow Pullman Highway near Floyd's cannabis shop. The defense said, "The probable cause affidavit used in the arrest of Coburger said that his cell phone pinged near the home several times before the killings." Newsweek reached out to Taylor and Thompson via email for comment. And not only that, but remember, the phone pinged allegedly the next morning. Bro allegedly showed back up at the scene of the crime to check on his handiwork. At least according to the official report and the affidavit, now is Brian Coburger's expert going to be able to throw some cold water on that. Maybe, I mean, I'm not gonna say no, we have to see all the evidence, right? And for me, that's what I follow. I follow the evidence. I don't have a bone to pick with Brian Coburger. I don't know the dude personally. All I care about is that there's four college kids who were murdered in their home and it sure looks like it was Brian Coburger who did it. But that's why we have a trial, right? That's why we have to go through all the evidence, take a look at everything that's presented and then see what's what. And right now, we're at the point where there's a lot cooking behind the scenes still that we're not privy to. So we have to keep that in mind. And as things continue to progress, obviously, we'll be following along as they evolve in the state of Idaho and their case against Brian Coburger. All of the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.