The judge in charge of the murder case against Bryan Kohberger has lifted his order that temporarily stopped the defense from surveying potential jurors. The survey is meant to help the defense's argument for a change of venue.
Anne Taylor, a public defender, hired a jury consultant to conduct surveys with several questions about the case. The surveys were to be carried out in three Idaho counties: Latah, where the murders took place in November 2022, and two larger counties where the defense wants the trial to be moved. as reported by CrimeOnline.
Kohberger is accused of killing four University of Idaho students in their off-campus rental. He has pleaded not guilty and plans to argue that he was out driving alone looking at the moon and stars at the time of the murders.
The defense survey was completed in Latah County, but some residents called the police after receiving phone surveys. On March 22, prosecutors filed a motion asking the judge to stop the defense from continuing, claiming that the surveys included questions that violated a non-dissemination order. A hearing on the matter was scheduled for April 4.
During the hearing, the state raised concerns about nine specific questions in the defense survey, which were read aloud. The judge then asked the defense to see if the survey could remove the problematic questions. Another hearing was set for April 10.
041924 Order Allowing Defense Surveys to Continue by kc wildmoon on Scribd
At the April 10 hearing, the defense argued that all the questions came from the public record, including media reports. The state objected to specific questions, including one about whether potential jurors had heard that Kohberger stalked the victims. The defense stated that this information was from media speculation, not fact.
Bryan Edelman, the jury consultant, told the court that he would not continue the survey if the same questions weren't used for the other two counties, as that would make the surveys inconsistent with the completed Latah County survey.
The April 10 hearing was also open to the public.
The judge issued his ruling last week, but it was not posted on the court website until this week. He ruled that the term 'public record,' as used in the non-dissemination order, refers to information from public hearings and unsealed case documents.
He noted that six of the nine questions objected to by the state were included in the public probable cause affidavit, and ruled that the defense did not violate the non-dissemination order in those cases. He made the same ruling on a seventh question, which was based on the feelings of potential jurors, not admissible evidence.
The judge mentioned that the remaining two questions, including one about awareness of any stalking, were not originally from the public record, but were still talked about extensively during the hearings. It was recognized that these 'media items' might not be accurate.
Since the information is now part of the public record, the Court does not see any benefit in stopping the defense from continuing the surveys or requiring the removal of the two questions in question, according to his statement.
The Judge has also scheduled a new hearing date for the change of venue motion to allow the consultant enough time to finish work in the additional two counties. The date set is June 27.
[Featured image: Bryan Kohberger listens to arguments during a hearing in Moscow, Idaho, on Thursday, Oct. 26, 2023. (Kai Eiselein/New York Post via AP, Pool)]