Does Idaho have a strong case against Kohberger?

In looking 8 months back now at the murders of the four University of Idaho students and the arrest just before New Year’s Day of this year of 28-year-old Bryan Kohberger in Pennsylvania, where does the case stand?

While the targeted start date of the trial is Monday, Oct. 2, don’t be shocked if that gets pushed back by weeks or even into 2024.

So, with what you know now from media reports and other such sources, how strong of a case would you say Idaho has against the defendant?

In looking at the case to date, there are arguments for both sides to make that they should feel confident getting the verdict they want at the end of the day.

With that in mind, let’s look at both sides and what they have going for them.

Prosecution –

• The state is leaning on the touch DNA it said it found on the knife sheath left behind by the killer/s. The sheath reportedly had touch DNA on the snap portion and was found in bed with victims Maddie Mogen and Kaylee Goncalves. After testing was done, the state is quite confident that touch DNA belongs to none other than Kohberger. So, what defense will the defense literally put up against such evidence? My guess is they go the O.J. route like Simpson’s team did several decades ago during the trial of the century. Lead defense attorney Anne Taylor will call upon the experts she brings in to refute the touch DNA. Will her efforts be successful? Time of course will tell.
• Look for prosecutors to also go after the pinging on Kohberger’s phone both before and after murders. They will try and convince the jury that Kohberger was stalking one or more of the female residents at 1122 King Road. He supposedly shut his phone off for a sizable period time leading up to, during, and shortly after the murders. Will a jury see such inactivity on the cell phone as one piece of the he’s guilty puzzle to fill in?
• Prosecutors will also highlight his vehicle supposedly being spotted in the area of the crimes. Much like the cell phone matter, the state will go hard on the white Elantra being seen very close to the home not only the morning of the murders, but others points in time. It will be up to the defense to refute this. One argument could be BK was in fact in the area but that does not mean he entered the home and murdered four college students.
• Finally, the state will focus in on allegations that BK stalked one or more of the women for months leading up to the killings. The state may or may not have phone or social media evidence that will back this up. Of course any such evidence would make it more difficult for the defense say that their client had no knowledge of or interaction with one or more of the women in the home.

Defense –

• What will it take for BK’s team to win him a not guilty verdict or at the very least a mistrial and back to square one? One of the best arguments for the defense is that up to now and perhaps even once a trial is underway is no one has come forward to clearly say they saw Kohberger either commit the murders or for that matter be inside the home on Nov. 13, 2022. One of two surviving roommates, Dylan Mortensen, who was on the second floor a short ways away from the room of victim Xana Kernodle, said she saw a masked figure with bushy eyebrows walk past her. The walk left her in a reported frozen state of shock. So, how many men for example in Idaho have bushy eyebrows? Translation is the state won’t get too far if it tries to say that was Kohberger who Mortensen spotted.
• In questioning and even discrediting one or both roommates, the defense needs to walk a fine line when it comes to calling one or both survivors (Bethany Funke was the other one) to the witness stand. While Mortensen’s description of what she saw and heard is shaky at best, you do not want to come across as victim-shaming. Doing so could upset some or many on the jury panel. Even with that to think about, by all means the defense should call the two survivors to the stand. Mortensen especially has some things to answer to in terms of what she supposedly saw and heard, why she did not go check on Xana Kernodle only yards away from her when safe to do so and more.
• Given this is a death penalty case, the state will have to prove even more so that it has the right guy. While the sentencing of guilt and the actual handing out of the sentence are two different things. know that the jury will likely demand even more proof that BK is the guy and not someone else. All the defense needs to do is plant a seed of doubt in the mind of one juror and we could end up back at square one as jurors gather and debate the final verdict.

If I was on the jury and asked to vote as of today, my vote would be NOT guilty.

That does not mean BK did not do it…. I just do not have enough hardcore evidence to send the man to his impending death.

With that thought in mind, would you convict if on the jury and the vote was today?