Bryan Kohberger Hearing Erupts in Heated Face-Off: 'I'm Angry!'

nothing that was done is worth the hysteria and the hyperbole that keeps getting expressed in this courtroom Brian coburg's defense team pushing back against claims their survey of potential jurors violated a gag order and tainted the jury pool while prosecutors seed no ground on the issue if it can't be done right or if that's what it takes to do it right then we need to do it this is a big case and the finger for this cannot be pointed to anybody but the defense thanks for joining me for Crime fix I'm Anette Levy things are certainly heating up in Brian cober's case typically things are pretty cordial between prosecutor Bill Thompson and cober's defense attorney Anne Taylor she actually worked for him many years ago but things have changed a little bit and become more tense since the prosecution found out that the defense commissioned a survey of potential jurors in lah County Idaho coburger has maintained his innocence in the murders of four University of Idaho students Maddie Mogan kayy gonalves Ethan chapen and Zanna kodal prosecutor Bill Thompson talked about the survey questions that were asked to the 400 residents in Leah County by phone he claims those violated the Court's non-dissemination order they included things like did you know Brian cobber was was arrested at his parents house in Pennsylvania did you know DNA found on the knife sheath matched Brian coburger and the state's position is that the fact specific questions and I I understand Dr Edelman why the questions are asked I understand his explanation doesn't change the fact that we have a non-dissemination order that specifically prohibits that kind of dissemination of facts specific facts about this case but there were questions that contained false information that really got the prosecutor mad specifically when Bill Thompson cross-examined Dr Brian Edelman who's conducting the survey take a look you acknowledge false that Mr cober allegedly sted on victims that's false you know that would be false which one did Mr cobg allegedly stalked one of the victims yes I was trying not to say that because but you but you knew you knew that was false I did so we learned something new there a couple of media Outlets had reported that Brian koberger stalked one of the victims in the months before the murders the prosecutor now says that's not true but back to the issue at hand the prosecution believes Dr edelman's methods tainted the jury pool and violated the gag order things got a little spicy I'm sorry if you're feeling hurt about us raising this issue I can see you were almost breaking down we were talking about slide number 33 uh oh slide number 35 that's not the intent and it's certainly I was I'm surprised to see that reaction from an experienced expert such as yourself so I apologize for that I I accept your apolog but the idea of after working really hard 15 years to develop a credible reputation and being told on watching on a zoom that I am tainting the jury pool and poisoning the jity and contaminating the jity PO by doing what's required and standard I'm not crying I'm angry yes it doesn't and please go ahead and be as angry as you like as you continue your work for the defense in this case so you probably detected a little sarcasm there from the prosecutor the defense meanwhile fighting back against the claim that their expert violated that non-dissemination order we didn't violate the non-dissemination order you the the information that now he's calling facts you know split flopping between whether or not it's a false fact or a fact that's that's in the survey the information that was put in the survey is based on the public record and information the way that State and State actors put information into the public record that has now been disseminated and we have not violated that order and I do resent being accused of that but Judge John judge said there were questions featured in the survey that included false information that may have been featured in media reports or on social media but those were not discussed and in an actual public document or record and that concerned him I mean those two questions were not in the public record okay they were I mean they came out but that that was not the not the uh Court the this the um I mean where it came from it just came out of the media or somewhere who knows where it came from but I don't think there's anything not that I'm aware of in the in the public record that said anything about that about your client Dr Adelman testified that he knew about the non- dissemination order let the existence of the non-dissemination order change how you did your work did not have you worked in cases where there's a non-dissemination order at other times many times and he said that just 3 to 4% of the people surveyed in Leon County didn't know about the case the number of people in Leon County who did know about the case and had feelings about it was much much higher because we asked these questions what we found is that um one like like I said very high recognition rate so 79% of respondents knew at least five of these items so the idea that we're s like undermining his due process rights everybody knows all this stuff very high rates um 82% of respondents who recognize seven of these items or more reported that he's guilty compared to if they only knew two or fewer only 29% by was guilty and the average was 6.2 so the average number of these details people already know 6.2 and Dr Adelman explained that the information included in his questions came from media reports and the affidavit filed in support of the murder charges information that was already out in the public what I did so want be clear is the standard practice in the industry done hundreds of times in high-profile cases throughout this country there's nothing I did to contaminate the jury B everything I included was widely disseminated by the media in this County hundreds of times if not more and the most of it came directly from an affidavit that the government released in a press conference and encouraged everyone to report did I tell you what questions to ask you did not would you take my advice if I told you what questions to ask I would not and I'll tell you why is as I mentioned my role is to be an objective expert to provide the court with information so the court can make a decision on if any remedial measures are necessary I don't care what questions you want in the ser and I don't care what questions the government wants Sur what I want to do is conduct a valid survey that's objective reliable and provides meaningful information that can be used by the court I'll get you back to this update on Brian cober's case in just a moment but I want to take a moment to tell you about sheath underwear it's a really great company my husband absolutely loves sheath because they make the most comfortable underwear he's ever worn I mean it feels like a soft Cloud I actually have a pair of them right here and they also offer a lot of support he also says the fit is amazing so if you're sick of those plain old boxers that were way too loose sheath fits really really well it's also worth noting that as the weather continues to warm up sheath is really great at staying cool especially if you're working out which a lot of people do seven days a week sheath has brand new materials too like bamboo and mesh for even more cooling comfort so it's really great if you're hot it's not sticking to you like a lot of other products can do right now you can go to sheath underwear. cmix for 20% off of your order again that's sheath underwear. comom crime fix to get 20% off a truly comfortable pair of underwear I think you should check it out judge judge did not make a decision on whether the survey would start over or whether it could continue in other counties judge judge pushed back the hearing for the change of venue motion to the end of June which probably is going to push everything in this case back Alan turkheimer is a jury consultant and he has conducted these surveys in the past so Alan what are your thoughts on the questions that Dr Edelman asks to potential jurors I think he's doing what he wants to do to try to get the result that he's hoping to get and that that happens all the time maybe he pushed things a little too much and is testing the limits by having some questions in there that aren't necessarily true but then again from the defense perspective it's not is about what is truthful it's about what potential jurors believe and if they believe something that's not truthful or that hasn't happened they need to know about it and I think that's the perspective he's taking with this survey and those questions that straddle the line of did it really happen versus was it possibly reported that way he offered an explanation for why he had to put false information in there and he said it was really to test bias and and that this is something he's done in the past what is your response to that I think he gets some credibility by having experienced doing this in the past now every case is different so he could say that he's done this in the past and maybe didn't have an issue with it but of course probably was in a certainly was in a different County was a different trial different set of circumstances so it's good that he has this experience and seems to know what he's doing but that doesn't mean that he can take the kind of Liberties that he may have taken uh if if the judge says it's not okay now it's very clear very very clear that the the prosecution wants this trial held in Leah County they don't want this trial moved so that's why they're having so much heartburn over there so they're saying well you know really our issue is the fact that this violated the non-dissemination order false information was put out there the J judge shared that concern you know he said we' we've tried to keep the noise out of this case the prosecution is contending that is their concern at this point in time whether or not this messed with the non-dissemination order your thoughts on that do you do you really think that cross the line I think it approached it and got very close to it and the judge might think that it did cross the line and we can understand the prosecution's perspective that they want to have this in the county but there are limited number of jury eligibles or potential jurors in the county with just under 40,000 people in the county you start to winow that down in terms of who jury eligible and then who's able to serve and even though the trial is a long ways away the prosecution just wants the status quo and doesn't want any influence or any anything to happen to to the potential jury pool that's why they're they're so upset about this where the defense thinks they have a legitimate reason to get it moved and so they are putting together this survey to look at the results just so they can go to the judge and say look this is a scientific uh tested study and we don't think that Mr cobber can get a fair trial here in Leah County Dr Edelman also stated that the non-dissemination order he was aware of it and it didn't impact how he conducted his work and he actually took offense at some of the things that the prosecution said you know basically that almost implying that he was tainting the jury pool right that's the argument the prosecution makes and Dr Edelman who's done this in the past he has his own agenda and only he knows exactly what the purpose was now he's clearly wanting to learn more about the venue and he wants to Tech bias and so I can see why he'd be offended by these allegations because it's it's a it's a serious charge to say that somebody's trying to Tain or tarnish prospective jurors in a case now a lot of times it could be Middle Ground where he's really not trying to do that but maybe the results of the survey are having that effect and so the judge has a lot to sort through to decide what what he wants to do moving forward he really does and basically Dr Adelman said if we're going to do this survey if I'm going to continue it has to be done the same way in every County because then you have to start over you know you can't just switch it up or else it's not scientific he says he's looking at conducting an objective survey and judge judge hasn't made a decision on any of this just yet it sounds like he's not going to say they violated the gag order he basically said that yesterday so the hearing on change of venue though has been pushed back till the end of June it's it's an interesting issue and it's getting a lot of attention Alan turkheimer thanks so much for coming on my pleasure thanks for having me and that's it for this episode of crime fix I'm me Janette leevy thanks so much for being with me I'll see you back here next time

Channel: Law&Crime Network

Views: 215,433

Keywords: law and crime, law and crime network, true crime, truecrime, true crime videos, court, trials, law&crime

Id: zC1LeR5a8oI

Length: 13min 38sec (818 seconds)

Published: Thu Apr 11 2024