LIVE! Kohberger Jury Tampering Hearing - WILD Questions Asked By The Defense To Potential Jurors
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 кві 2024
- #lawyeryouknow #universityofidaho #moscow #idaho4
Watch Our Entire Bryan Koherber Playlist Here: • Bryan Kohberger: Unive...
This is the UA-cam account to follow for streaming video: @judgejohnjudge
🔴 Do you or someone you know need to speak to a real lawyer about a wrongful death or personal injury case? Please reach out to our firm and we will make sure to answer your questions or find someone who can. Our consultations are always free and confidential. You can call our firm at (727) 441-9030 or email us at lawyeryouknow@gmail.com.
✅ For business inquiries contact me at lawyeryouknow@gmail.com
✅ Let's connect: www.tragoslaw.com/
Twitter - @tragoslaw
Instagram - /tragoslaw
Facebook - /tragoslaw
TikTok - /tragoslaw
✅ Join our email list here - bit.ly/33lV3Mb
✅ Get your Lawyer You Know merch here - bit.ly/LYKMerch
✅ Become a LYK Channel Member Here - bit.ly/3OecDDD
SUPERCHATS & DISCLAIMER - 1. Superchats read out are not to be taken as my opinion nor endorsed by me. 2. Questions are answered on best efforts based on my knowledge and jurisdiction.
🔴 NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Intro Music: WNAQ9M6UJF
Outro Music: 7RELUAQ9VY - Розваги
"Have you read, seen or heard xyz" well now I have........
& will be looking up more info about it🤦🏼♀️
😂😂😂❤❤❤
Bingo!
And at that point Bill Thompson read the questions that he objected to so more potential jurors would hear them.
Now I am researching all of those things, because that is very interesting. Now I can't serve on your jury
If the prosecution sent out the same survey, defense would LOSE their minds!!!
You don't know 🙏🏻 it depends in the questions i think. But what else is there to ask to make people even more biased 😅
@@esthersiersema by “the same” I meant the same questions worded the same way.
@@ScienceisRadAF I agree. I understand the defense lawyer having someone else coming up with the questions, but how do they allow the survey to be done without reviewing the questions.
@@OnePunchLion"Have you heard about the case where 4 students were stabbbed... heard the name of the defendant... if so, do you have an opinion about the guilt or innocence of the defendant... Have you been following this case on social media, etcetera, without giving ANY of those 'facts'.
This is trial turning into a circus show and trial hadent even started judge giving to much platform to defence
Defense WANTS to move trial to another county so this was a strategic move for them. 🙄
My sentiments exactly.
I agree: it was a purposeful move
Probably but it might be best as Moscow is a College town. This never ending publicity will begin to negatively affect the school’s enrollment, therefore the town. I’m just trying to see how the people in the town might be better off to encourage it to be moved. There’s also the huge cost that will be a burden on the town’s people. Unless, the town is very wealthy and hasn’t been negatively affected by Covid and the awful economy, they may want to support a change of venue. If, I were a tax paying citizen living in Moscow, I’d be asking questions about the money. The costs could be exorbitant: a possible innocent verdict, hung jury or conviction followed by an Appeal. This could go on for a very long time with a huge price tag. Even if the State provided some financial support for the case, there will still be other costs which will just naturally roll over to the town itself. Just a thought to consider. Regardless, it’s going to cost a fortune for everyone. The College is likely taking a huge beating with low enrollment and decline in donations from Alumni.
100% agree
Thumbs up to Ann Taylor.
I have been a research professional for just shy of 30 years. These questions are leading and will not yield valid results. Supposedly Ms Taylor wants the trial moved to Boise so it does not surprise me that this strategy was implemented.
It’s also not an anonymous survey if they have retained the phone numbers!
My sister lives in the same city I do. I'm a crime addict and watch everything. My point is my sister never hears about trials going on unless I tell her. So, I know there are people that don't know anything about so many crimes occurring.
Exactly. My family knows nothing about this case.
true, i may over estimate how 'known' all of this is because youtube knows what i love, the algorithms give me what i want.
I was going to say this as well! I have a very large family. I am the only one who listens to these cases. The rest would not have any idea.
How large is the city? The size of Moscow?
My mom who never watches the news, lives in western Washington. She's heard of the Idaho murders because coverage was everywhere, she's glad "the murderer" was caught and convicted. When I tell her he hasn't had his day in court yet, she says "I don't want to hear about it"
My uncle who lives in Central California, and gets all his news from NBC and Netflix, believes bk murdered the Idaho 4, and that he is guilty of all the missing persons between his parents house and his college because the media said the police were looking at him as a suspect. (He also believes that the prosecution showed the murder weapons in the murdaugh trial because the documentary said they did)
I'm in az and have heard all the media stories convicting bk, but I also remember that the kid from the food truck was "definitely the murderer" until he wasn't, and that the Uber driver was "a stalker and the murderer", until he wasn't.
The leading question issue: It seems to this trial lawyer that I want to show the judge that the jury pool has absorbed, not my defenses, but the State's claims: I stalked her, I have no alibi but driving about in the night, my DNA is on the sheath. From the defense point of view these claims, now embedded already in the pool's mind, are without foundation in fact. Now I go in having to _change_ minds, an almost impossible task most trial lawyers know. The idea there is anyone in the county who has not heard these claims is a bit silly.
I'm still waiting for the State to show me the sheath was in Koberger's hands, which means show me you can corroborate your expert's _opinion_ Kohberger's DNA is on the sheath.
They wanted to force a venue change. If she’s claiming she didn’t see the questions before sending them out is negligent at the very least.
Agree she wants a bigger town with nice hotels & restaurants & a nice courthouse. She said as much nothing to do with BK, she wants to win for her own ego
Absolutely agree my sentiment exactly
My question is if she does get the change of venue, doesn’t that negate 99% of her arguments for summer 2025 date? She said because of the college being in session in the fall/winter, it had to be pushed to next summer…
@@tinabarnett9199 Someone else said that too that she wanted it moved to keep from driving the 1.5 hours that she has to drive to Moscow.
And forcing BK to waive his right to a speedy trial isn't?
I’m still over here wanting to know when the state is ever gonna hand over the evidence to defense that they keep stalling on!
They hand it over when they get it. They're not in control of other agencies. The feds give you shit when they want to, the defense will get it when they get it. A guy on trial for quad homicide isn't the feds biggest priority.
"Did you know about all this shit?"
"Well, now i do"
Watching from South Africa and we know all about the case
I'm watching from Ireland and only know what the court or prosecution, or wild speculation has released. The evidence I have heard is nothing like enough for him to have been prosecuted never mind held in custody.
lol that’s great. Watching from the western United States and we all know about the case! Change of venue hahaha
There should be a change of NU because everyone involved is interconnected from that town. That is the point.
Lol have ya run into JS? 🥱
Portland Maine here,… we know Alot about this case
Oh em GEE. Can't BELIEVE they put that SPECIFIC information in the questions. Holy Moly!😮
Why? It's the basis of the media coverage that was blasted out for months
The questions were based on stuff that people speculated, not factual evidence.
@tracyswain7942 the questions were based on what was reported as true by the media. Which if people believed it would prejudice them against bk
There’s no way this was an accident. No way.
Amen!
No, of course the survey wasn't an accident. It's a common procedure in high profile cases. Bryan's team didn't make up the questions. The professional survey guy got every bit of info off the internet. Not sure what people are accusing Ann of doing wrong. Can you explain please?
If she didn’t do that, she should be fired. This trial must change revenue, period. BK might be guilty, but he has the right to a fair trial, and we can clearly see he won’t.
I agree! This was not an accident…sneaky sneaky sneaky and stall stall stall. AT proposes to just review the surveys and take out things but that isn’t fair either…they need to start over imo,
@@wezylinn. How do you know every bit of the information came from the internet for sure? You don’t! The professional survey guy didn’t say he wasn’t even at the hearing and we were not there and according to AT she didn’t know what questions yet she is aware of them. How convenient this survey will be cause for change of venue…so be it but sneaky imo.
yes, perfect example of leading questions. I hate when I'm doing a trial and the other lawyer leads his witness the whole time. And when I object, the judge gets annoyed with me for delaying the trial!! The evidence should come from the witness, not the lawyer. Leading questions allows the lawyer to give the evidence he/she wants in the record by prompting the witness, instead of the witness giving the evidence based on their actual recollection.
I find her incompetent, condescending & underhanded in this. Regardless of the damaging questions, 'she' SHOULD have reviewed them. She's claiming plausible deniability? Ugh
She should have, at the very least. given the "rules" (I forget what the legal term us for the document) to the company doing the survey but she didn't even do that and she absolutely should have.
IMO the defense has been grasping at straws and this is really shady.
Oh she isn't incompetent. What she did was very deliberate. Tainting the jury, and trying to make the judge look prejudiced against her. She knows what she's doing.
@@Xershade The questions are literally based on what the state had disclosed to the public and some media rumors the state has done nothing about lmao wtf if the prosecutor wants to whine about jury tampering he should not have released PCA that the media have built their slanted campaign on.
Yup
Prosecutor didn't say people avoid news of this case in case they are called up for jury service. He said that they avoided it because they didn't want to hear about it - there is a difference.
I think its just stupid they released the evidence before the trial, to the public! Then you cannot have a fair jury, in these days 🤷🏼♀️ with next to news papers etc. We have social media, even i from the Netherlands know what evidence there is in a murder case from Idaho... (Even if the DNA is / was thrown our of the case i would know it was there) So if we in the Netherlands know so much details about this case, then everyone in his hometown knows something.
You cannot tell me people did not hear about it.. just as if with the school shootings and the crumbly case a whole lot of us knew things before the trial
@@esthersiersemathe whole point was this was a survey on what is already out there
@@Somero5115I agree but then I’m back and forth on it. I think about my aunt for example. She doesn’t follow any of this stuff. If she got a call asking those questions, she’d immediately know way more than she intended, despite the fact that it’s already out there. I can see both sides to it honestly. I’m just glad I’m not a lawyer haha.
@@esthersiersema I'm not sure I agree, I don't know all of the evidence the state has because of the dissemination order but even with accessable reporting available that doesn't mean you can't find people that don't know anything about the case other than the murders happened and a suspect was arrested.
Exactly everything that was brought up is either in court documents or media…glad BT said not all of this information is true…hmmmm
omg. if they hadn't read, seen, or heard these things before, they have now... not good
Jurors can hear information. They just need to be willing to listen to the evidence presented in court and make their decision based only on the information presented in court.
You mean like how the jurors thought the JD trial was "just two grown up spoiled children being children.....wait a second Amber did what now?!" Or how in the GP trial people thought "well screw her we don't like her she's Gwyneth Paltrow.....wait a second what is this guy suing her on?"
I think she is full of bs. What reputable lawyer would allow a survey company to run free without checking what they were going to ask people in the town where four students were slaughtered. Time for her to go. And soon,
Agree
Ya like there is a flaw or whatever she knows what he is doing number one she is letting us know parts of this case is bs... And untrue... Now we get to figure what that is whilst they get a new bunch of questions n people involved
I think if BT OR JUDGE JUDGE were so worried about the questions that they were going to ask they should have asked prior to the survey
@@denisekoenig9479 They can't ask because they never knew she was doing one, in the first place. She never told them, and that is what they are complaining about. They are not concerned about the survey in and of itself, they are concerned with the far reaching effects such as causing a mistrial, overturned convictions etc.
She's not going anywhere. Why do you think she was put on this case to begin with? She has more experience. It was careless of her if she didn't review the questions. When the answer is already in it then is it really a fair question? I think not.
I find it hard to believe the defense didn’t know what questions were being asked! She knew before they went out.
Her strategy to delay the trial has been everything in this case goes across her desk, so she approved the questions. The taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for a change of venue. We are already paying AT 1.2 million.
I just can’t believe the defense wouldn’t pre-approve questions or at minimum have the court approve them. This could’ve all been avoided.
Prosecution got a transcript about survey…he was sitting on it for 2 weeks…and then wanted to cry about it when people recorded…cause why would you straight away record a phone call? And then them getting cops involved it’s pathetic and shows Bryan can’t get a fair trial on Latah
@@sunshineplusu8391exactly
@@sunshineplusu8391 I don’t recall them talking about the prosecutor sitting on transcripts, what part was that in?
I don’t think someone calling in means bias. For example, they may have wanted to find out how to be removed from call lists or have a personal history to where they feel connected to the sheriffs dept. This is an example of individual experiences that juries are made up of
Regardless, still bizarre questions weren’t approved by the court
@@sunshineplusu8391 Um, because the courts don't call you for jury questions. They send you a physical form that says fill this out, and show up at court. If I got a call related to a court case, you bet I'm recording that and forwarding it to the police. It's beyond improper, you also know who answered what then so it's not an anonymous survey like little miss defense attorney was claiming. If Brian can't get a fair trial in Latah county its her fault.
The questions are literally based on what the state had disclosed to the public and some media rumors the state has done nothing about lmao wtf if the prosecutor wants to whine about jury tampering he should not have released PCA that the media have built their slanted campaign on.
I feel like Anne was trying to force a change of venue. She didnt review the questions, she didnt let the court know.
Right? It feels like she wanted to have plausible deniability if/when she was asked about the surveys
From day one, figured the defense would try pulling stuff.
Ann Taylor put on a performance and abused the use of cameras in court to put on that performance,she only showed it's these outlets she is relying on polluting,she has channels on here influencing us,the really pushy ones are worth watching
If she was my lawyer and didn’t do the survey, I would fire her. There is no way you can deny what people know. I live in CT and heard all of the questions from the survey. Ridiculous what they are doing. bK is innocent, that is the law and he had all the rights of an innocent man. It is better to shedder the constitution instead.
She doesn't need the court's 'permission' to do a survey
They did it to purposely taint the jury pool and, at minimum, create another delay, but hoping to force a change in the venue, which will also create more delay.
The stupid thing is the venue she's fighting to leave is a college town. They literally change population makeup every year, you know because people enter and finish school each year...
The questions are literally based on what the state had disclosed to the public and some media rumors the state has done nothing about lmao wtf if the prosecutor wants to whine about jury tampering he should not have released PCA that the media have built their slanted campaign on.
Lots of people dog on lawyers until they need one. When you need an attorney who zealously defends his client, it’s a comforting thing.
Peter…Your answer to ‘what would you do if you were the judge?’ Was excellent!
My sister’s brother-in-law is a former DA, now defense attorney. He recently represented a high-profile client. He would not allow himself to be named or pictured when the case was covered by Dateline and 20/20 for the reason you gave.
She KNOWS exactly what she is doing IMO and I really don’t like how she talks to the judge!
Guess you're down with the "good ol'boys" club
I don't blame her he's a bully and biased. Him and BT look down on her being a public defender and female imo
Of course she knows what she is doing this is a normal survey that gets done in high profile cases, the company has been involved in over 40 high profile cases…this gets done every day…
Well I don't like the way the Judge talks to her!!
@@sunshineplusu8391 No, it doesn't. Especially not without the court's knowledge or permission. If the prosecution did this, she'd be making a nuclear reactor blush with her meltdown.
In the days of the internet and social media, I think it’s insane to assume that the information leaked by the questions will be confined to the 400 people surveyed.
it won't now, since the prosecutor blasted the questions out in the hearing... doing exactly what he was arguing against, small town, no experience, clear bias
Nothing was leaked though. All of the questions were based on very public news reports. Also not all 400 got asked all of the questions, only people said that they had heard stuff about the case already.
@@ChillyJack Good point.
@@healthynycwellnessthis prosecutor is so bad. From the beginning he is making sure BK doesn’t have a fair trial. Not sharing information, going behind the defenses back to do his shenanigans. I thought it was going to be fair, there is no way BK is going to get it. Even the judge in my opinion is already on the prosecution side. I wonder what is going on there.
@@healthynycwellnessindeed for way more then 400 people 😂😂😂😂
As a taxpayer in Idaho, this makes me angry. I feel that the defense is tainting the jury pool.
Its been tainted from the beginning by prosecution and leaks.. they are pissed now bc they see that Ann taylor has legal means to change the venue.
Looks to me like the defense is trying to prejudice the pool of potential jurors to support a claim that Kohburger cannot get a fair and impartial jury. The defense also appears to be attempting to overwhelm the presumption of evidence and set up an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, which is a Sixth Amendment violation. Playing dice with your client's life at stake is reckless and dangerous. The preferred approach is to ask prospective jurors what they recall about the case and whether they discussed the case with others and/or expressed their opinions about the defendant's guilt or innocence.
Sorry: Line 3 should be presumption of innocence, not presumption of evidence.
This is exactly what I think their goal has been! From the moment they wanted the grand jury indictment unsealed. They KNEW that would taint the jury but filed that motion anyway.
Thankfully that was denied but lo and behold, they claim it’s tainted regardless.
They’ve been playing games IMO. Trying to get more time
@@MasoninblueYou can tap the three dots on the right, select “edit,” fix or add words & resubmit. ✌🏽 Then you can delete your clarifying comment. ✌🏽
The survey provided direct information to people who may not have known that information.
No, it doesn’t. We already know everything in that survey. And more….
@@laurenmay2098not everyone follows the news, and not everyone continuosly follows true crime.
You are correct we just had 8 people stabbed and 4 died in a quiet neighborhood here. Some people I work with didn’t know a thing about it. Yet it was national news on all channels. It was a huge thing here.
All that was asked is already out there
@@Sheeply356which is the whole point of a survey
Hearing something does not make someone biased. The questions only serve to taint potential jurors without asking a follow-up on whether the potential juror BELIEVES what they heard.
If they answered yes they were asking follow up questions…
@@sunshineplusu8391 They shouldn't be asking those questions in the first place. "Did you hear Brian commited four homicides and his DNA was found at the crime scene after he was seen riving past and stalking victims." is so prejudicial the defense would lose what little of mind she has left if the prosecution did that.
The questions are literally based on what the state had disclosed to the public and some media rumors the state has done nothing about lmao wtf if the prosecutor wants to whine about jury tampering he should not have released PCA that the media have built their slanted campaign on.
This could have been avoided had the defense team sought court approval prior to sending out these surveys. 🤷🏼♀️
The court did approve the survey I thought. Not the specific questions that were asked but approved for the survey to b conducted
This could have been avoided if the judge read his dissemination order which allows them to talk about issues in the public record.
The court did approve sending out a survey. They have no right to approve the contents.
@@Macy-fk1ik The court most certainly does have every right to approve the contents. How would you feel if the prosecutors sent that out? Neither side unilaterally talks to jurors, it goes to the judge, who then decides on it. Law practice 101.
They have no obligation to seek approval on their work product
Thank you as always, Peter! I don't understand how so many are convinced of his guilt, we literally know nothing.
Because the media presented him as 100% the murderer (he was actually the third person they falsely convicted) and the sheep sleep easier when they "know" that the dangerous murderer is in jail and not out their planning their next murder
Because of dna and the fact they didn’t take a random friend from the group. They tracked him cross country it appears to be a very through investigation and also every opportunity the defense has had to help his case has been a joke. Like the alibi which didn’t legally qualify as an alibi. Or trying to upheave the whole judicial system on a grand jury inditement.
@@JJ-zr6fu this is stuff from the media, not fact. We don't really "know" anything.
@@Tinmann_77 very interesting!!
@@JJ-zr6fu She is not a good criminal defence lawyer. The non-alibi alibi and the grand jury burden of proof argument were both ridiculous and wasted the first year of these pre-trial proceedings. And now waiting for all the expert's reports before providing his alibi sure reeks of AT manufacturing an alibi for BK. If nothing else, if he is convicted, he has a sure fire appeal on the grounds of incompetent counsel.
Bill Thompson reading the questions in open court live streaming to the public has just done the exact thing he has issue with but to an even larger audience!
Very true!
They’re not going to be using those questions moving forward. And, frankly, most people have better things to do than to follow this hearing.
These are people seeking out the case though..... some of these 400 people may not have had a clue about this case or the pertinent information regarding the case
@@amykatona9548 💯
To me, the difference is we have the context when he's reading them out in the hearing. He also explicitly says some of the questions are not factually based and that they could be prejudicial.
That didn't happen when the surveys were being taken.
They put specifics out there because they want the venue changed. No I don’t think she left it up to anyone. His attorney is shady
The specifics are already out there - the defense didn't write the questions; the information is out there ... the question is really about the spot light on the information that is out there.
The prosecutor is shady, if you ask me? He is worse. Disgraceful what he is doing just to be political to his constituents. Shame on who think BK doesn’t deserves a fair trial.
Agree noway she didn't know word for word Anne needs full control at all times
@@aairsick The correct way to conduct the survey is to ask open ended free-form responses to generic questions regarding what, if anything, someone already knows about the case.
Guess what tainting them with false information does? IT TAINTS THEM!
The correct way to check for any bias or prejudice is to ask them GENERIC questions, such as:
Have you heard about a quadruple homicide that took place near the University of Idaho? If so, when or how did you hear about that case?
Do you know the name of the defendant in that case? If so, what is his/her name?
Do you know specifically how the State alleges these victims were specifically murdered?
Do you know what the defendant’s alleged relationship to any of the victims is?
Do you know what the defendant’s occupation was prior to their arrest in connection to this case? If so, what was their occupation? Who did they work for?
Do you know if the defendant has any prior drug history or criminal record?
Have you watched any news or read any online or print media regarding the case? If so, what was the name of the show or website, magazine or newspaper you saw information about this case?
•What was the story specifically about?
Do you belong to any social media groups that have discussed the case?
Do you have any opinions on the defendant’s probable innocence or guilt in regards to this case? If so, what are they?
Do you personally know any of the victims, attorneys, or law enforcement that are a part of this case? If so, who are they and how do you know them?
Etc.
***
And THAT is how you can poll potential jurors WITHOUT tainting them or introducing them to details or specific information that they may have not otherwise heard if it weren’t for your survey.
What Anne is doing is going around asking people if they have heard specific rumors or specific details about this case by actually providing those specific rumors and details to them!
How is it shady to ask if people have heard the stories that were put out on EVERY SINGLE MEDIA CHANNEL FOR MONTHS
I've heard all of that stuff reported, and I don't even live within a thousand miles of Idaho. It's already been disseminated in the media..
There is zero chance that Ann didn’t approve the questions before they went out to the public.
And if she did, then she's not doing her job properly!
Agree! It is grossly negligent if true!
Why this is a company that has been involved in over 40 high profile cases, this is what they do.
Exactly …
I think she mislead BT earlier and he assumed she didn’t review them because later in the hearing she says to the judge “I didn’t write the questions but I knew what would happen.. I mean.. umm”
I believe that even if people didn't know about it then they would have looked it up on social media after receiving it. She is willing to do whatever she has to so she can get a change of venue.
There is no person in latah County that didn't hear about the 4 college students being murdered in Moscow.
They all listened to what the media was saying.
They did it to force a venue change. The defense knew, they should be sanctioned, and if a venue is changed they nees to face professional consequences perhaps losing their law license for a year or two
💯
I was actually thinking this myself.
Absolutely manipulative move. Shame on AT. She knew exactly what she was doing. Don't believe her BS. It is intentional tainting of jury pool.
Nope. Just bc you dont like something doesnt mean punishment.
@@dellasandor4281 🤡
I feel like Anne Taylor's argument is weird? He clearly stated we have a problem with the questions asked ... She continues to skip over that and not address it and argue other things that are not being addressed from the court???? 🤦♀️
conveniently avoids it because she can't answer for it, she claims she didn't even review the questions 😅
She is being intentionally oblivious.
Yeah, I’ve never seen an attorney avoid acknowledging the point the Judge was making as hard as she did. It was pathetic because she knew.
@@michellelee7230 Most attorneys know that ANYTHING involving the word jury most certainly needs talking with the other side and especially needs the courts permission. Neither side is allowed to talk to jurors without permission, the defense would lose her mind if the prosecution did what she did.
The questions contain information they had released via arrest affidavit so they should blame themselves. They have been polluting the jury pool since January 2023
How is Anne Taylor even trying to argue a Due Process violation when she had every opportunity to be heard by the judge and submit whatever argument she wanted after she met with the State on that Thursday and they told her they were going to the judge with the info the next day?
Why didn’t she submit a motion Friday morning and get ahead of the State?
I’m not sure how she is even trying to argue a Due Process violation when a hearing was set so she could present her arguments and evidence to the court?
Her flat out accusing the judge of violating her client’s right to Due Process because she was ordered to temporarily stop potentially tampering with members of the local jury pool until a hearing could be held on the issue is an exceptionally egregious claim.
As it is, she admits that she never even reviewed or approved the survey questions before potential jurors were contacted, which was grossly negligent of her, at best.
She sounded like a complete fool trying to turn it around on the judge when what she basically wants is to be allowed to have free reign to tamper with the jury pool in whatever manner she sees fit-even if it could actually end up causing irreparable harm to her own client!
I think she needs to be sanctioned.
She got caught sneaking behind the Judge's back with her hand in the cookie jar. That's why she's pissed at the judge.
She also calls the trail the "innocence phase", lady get off your horse your client is innocent by default, you're never proving innocence in a trial because the defendant is already innocent, the state is trying to prove guilt, hence GUILT phase.
Yeah she has an ego problem at the least...
The questions are literally based on what the state had disclosed to the public and some media rumors the state has done nothing about lmao wtf if the prosecutor wants to whine about jury tampering he should not have released PCA that the media have built their slanted campaign on.
The irreparable harm to a fair trial has been done by the prosecutor and court releasing arrest affidavit to the world and not doing anything about media rumor mill and letting the Goncalves tamper with the jury pool as much as they have.
The thing that seems odd that public information, that is part of the public discourse by media, news, etc., are condisered prejudicial - - is crazy. This is nonsense; it is not something the public is not already available to access.
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, did you know that @aairsick was driving around stalking the victims before brutally murdering them and we can prove it by showing you surveillance evidence of a car similar to the defendant's being seen around the area and the DNA evidence on the sheath of the murder weapon found at the crime scene." wouldn't be the least bit problematic for you if you were Brian?
Also the stalking stuff hasn't even been dealt with yet, its literally just rumors at the moment, there's been zero court hearings to show any evidence or discuss it yet.
Public discourse is definitely prejudicial because many of the media are prejudiced. Just because people can access the information doesn't mean one party should call public attention to it.
Ann taylor knew exactly what the questions were, she got caught and is angry about getting caught, this is why she is fighting “other” reasons, besides the question
Yep
Totally agree
Anne Taylor thinks everyone is stupid. She actually believes she can be sneaky and not get caught because of her narrow mindedness. I can tell by her behavior.
@Pllm30 Have you seen the people that believe everything she says it’s crazy people actually thought she’d get the grand jury overturned
I question her character because this maneuver seems so malicious and villainous. She should be fired at this point.
Open-ended questions should be asked but if closed phrase without divulging facts and media hype.
Who said so? Who said she should not do a survey? She is free to do it, because she is free to defend her client. She is not obliged to anyone else’s but BK. Got it? Or should I get the constitution? WTH?
Prosecution was under her spell now he's angry bc he fills a numbty
@@laurenmay2098 The correct way to check for any bias or prejudice is to ask them GENERIC questions, such as:
Have you heard about a quadruple homicide that took place near the University of Idaho? If so, when or how did you hear about that case?
Do you know the name of the defendant in that case? If so, what is his/her name?
Do you know specifically how the State alleges these victims were specifically murdered?
Do you know what the defendant’s alleged relationship to any of the victims is?
Do you know what the defendant’s occupation was prior to their arrest in connection to this case? If so, what was their occupation? Who did they work for?
Do you know if the defendant has any prior drug history or criminal record?
Have you watched any news or read any online or print media regarding the case? If so, what was the name of the show or website, magazine or newspaper you saw information about this case?
•What was the story specifically about?
Do you belong to any social media groups that have discussed the case?
Do you have any opinions on the defendant’s probable innocence or guilt in regards to this case? If so, what are they?
Do you personally know any of the victims, attorneys, or law enforcement that are a part of this case? If so, who are they and how do you know them?
Etc.
***
And THAT is how you can poll potential jurors WITHOUT tainting them or introducing them to details or specific information that they may have not otherwise heard if it weren’t for your survey.
What Anne is doing is going around asking people if they have heard specific rumors or specific details about this case by actually providing those specific rumors and details to them!
The prosecution knew about survey that had a transcript for 2 weeks and had no problems until people ran to prosecution and had phone recordings of it…just saying…BT ran like a little kid to cry about it but didn’t say anything for over 2 weeks about it
@@sunshineplusu8391 It is my understanding defense did not provide transcript until 1:30 the Thurs before it all blew up that Friday. BT knew they were going to survey but not specifics re expert or questions.
It’s really bizarre to me that Anne Taylor would be the one approving this company to conjure questions going out to 400 people that would actually harm Kohberger like that. These questions, in essence, teach the 400 to be “guilters”. It’s pretty clear they’re trying to force and cause the need for change of venue.
Those questions are literally based on PCA mostly (the rest is from media rumors which the defense, state and judge confirmed to be false) so if they’re taining the jury pool, then the state tainted the pool first by releasing the PCA to the public doh
@@pappa_rodger Sure there’s info on the PCA, at least the PCAs weren’t hand-delivered to 400 people. Do you think there’s anybody out there in that area that hasn’t seen the PCA?
She also said the company read articles, well how did they not know about the NDO?
@@pappa_rodger there is nothing in the PCA stating Butcher Bry’ stalked or followed any victim on SM.
@@realist4realits impossible to disclose what's already been disclosed to the jury pool.
If they haven’t heard they have heard now. Tainting the Jury pool. They want to move. Shady.
I'm convinced they purposely asked those questions so they could force a change of venue. Underhanded, at best. I'm not a law expert but there should be some type of repercussions.
There is none because the judge is kissing Anne's ass for some reason. He prob doesn't want to be blamed for anything happening to the case so it has to be tried again.
💯 Agree it’s to force a change of venue.
Agree 💯. She’s devious.
??? 😂
I dunno, it’s risky to poison your pool just because you want to swim in another pool. What if you aren’t allowed to switch? Then you swim in a poisoned pool.
What she said makes sense - she used a survey company and didn’t check their questions because they were within their area of expertise. She didn’t expect them to blow it.
The defense attorney sure is taking a hard tone with the judge.
GOOD!!!
@@dellasandor4281 it is a stupid thing to do whether you like the judge or not
Right? I wish he’d slow her roll just a bit. Seems very disrespectful.
About time. The 'good ol' boys' keep walking all over her!
She making herself sound an unprofessional and incompetent
I don’t agree with these tactics. This is absolutely disgusting. I feel so badly for the families.
My nephews know absolutely nothing about the case because they are not interested. They do not know anything about it.
Good! 👍🏼
Go ahead and feel badly. So do I
, but this is the law going on. We cant just want someone to pay without a fair trial by law & jury decision.
The questions are literally based on what the state had disclosed to the public and some media rumors the state has done nothing about lmao wtf if the prosecutor wants to whine about jury tampering he should not have released PCA that the media have built their slanted campaign on.
I'm so mad at myself that I missed the live on this as I wanted to be in the live chat. Why would Ann not be transparent on what she was doing and more so not check what the survey questions are.
I live in California, and I read, saw, and heard all of those things. Where the heck can he get a fair trial?
Maybe China or North Korea
Because not everyone has and now she has made sure.
@@loveboxers7554 I was being facetious.
@@rubiirae lol
@rubiirae Probably not China, I live in China and all my colleagues no about this case. Some pro-bergers, some guilters
She had a WHOLE YEAR WHAT HAS SHE DONE. I think she likes creating crazy.
She said she didn’t WRITE the questions. I’m unclear on whether she saw them before they went out though. I don’t think that has been stated clearly.
I highly doubt she didn't see the questions, that's why she's equivocating
There’s no way she didn’t review the questions. She needed to make sure they were bias so she could force a change of venue. Her words to the judge were “I didn’t write the questions but I knew what would happen.” My jaw hit the floor when she said that because that implies she reviewed the questions. She must’ve mislead BT when they spoke about it earlier and he thought she didn’t review them.
Its insane for the lawyers to assume everyone is a true crime weirdo like us, my mom asked me who got elected president like 5 days after in 2020. Just saying some people do not care about things.....just saying people with no clue really exist
Yeah, I’m married to one! 😊
Totally. It’s insane the people in the comment that are like “I am watching from the Netherlands and know all about this case!”
Yeah…because you watch lawyers that cover criminal prosecutions on UA-cam. LOL. Have you ever heard of an algorithm?
My mother’s social media is almost all crochet patterns and videos of dogs. If you don’t watch legal commentary or modern true crime…you won’t know much. Even the local people would probably have heard about the murders and the fact that someone was arrested but won’t be watching court filings or online rumours.
💯%! 🫶🏽
“Weirdo” to you it’s someone that doesn’t do what you want them to do. To me it’s people are different and have different interests, you calling people “weirdos” because they don’t like what you like…already tells me a lot about you, but not the people you are calling weirdos
@@sunshineplusu8391 wow.....a pointless comment...
So in Moscow if you ask questions about Kohberger they call 911 on you. Then the police have the detective who arrested Kohberger (officer Payne) investigate the complaint, this sounds like a bad sitcom.
Taylor says: I KNEW this was coming after talking to prosecution Thursday!!
Well, then why didn’t you proactively go to the court instead of letting the court be cornered on a Friday night and then cry when what you predicted unfolds exactly how you expected?
Maybe because the judge even said he should speak under each other
Peter, i think the questions you suggested are totally the way to go. i appreciate that AT is fighting for her client, and i hate that we didn’t hear from the expert who MADE the survey- maybe the things they asked and how they did it makes sense. but seriously i can’t fathom that anyone thought those questions were helpful in gathering information. it makes them sound like facts. and the general public already doesn’t do enough of their own research, people def would have just accepted those statements as true.
Isn't it possible the defense did this purposefully knowing the survey was inappropriate in order to get a venue change ...even at the risk of admonished or sanctions from the court?
Btw this is a company that does these surveys a lot they have been involved in over 40 high profile cases, they know what they are doing…there is a process…just saying
💯
@@sunshineplusu8391 you keep repeating that comment, but i dont think you know what that means. it does not matter what the company has done. this was a violation.
And then people scoff at conspiracy theories when they themselves come up with this nonsense
This is going to be a circus! The longer they wait to do the trial the more info will be out there for the public to know. At this point I’m not sure there is anyone left who could answer no to many of those questions.
Exactly!
But we heard all about those questions, I live in CT and I know. The prosecutor just made sure china learns about it. His ego is damaging the case, more and more.
@@laurenmay2098but you are following the case and wouldn’t be allowed to be a juror in the first place, neither would anyone who is actively following this case or watching these pretrial hearing.
That isn’t exposing potential jurors who aren’t following this case to know details about this case.
@@UnfilteredMind Rolling my eyes until 2080, what?
What needs to address is that, 400 people is a very big bite out of the “Permanent resident Pool”. People don’t understand how small this county is.
Let's see? 40,978 in Latah county. About 16.5 % of the residents were surveyed. Is that a big bite? It's less than 20% of the population.
@@traciemcdaniel3660 " About 16.5 % of the residents were surveyed." Well, your math is a little puzzling. But those 400 survey recipients will talk about the survey with others.
@@eriksmith2514 I was doing the math for a couple of different things. I thought you take the number (the population of latah) & multiply by 400 people surveyed) to get the percentage. I must be wrong oh well.
@@traciemcdaniel3660 400 is 1% of 40,000.
@@traciemcdaniel3660 Find the percentage by dividing the lower number by the higher number. For example 2 / 10 =.20. 400 / 40000 = .01
This survey made the people biased if they were not before! This is terrible!
I work for a jury consulting firm and we have done this type of survey for high profile cases. Normally the client will ask to review the questions. A third party does the calling and hopefully they have retained all the numbers they called using a random dialing system. They should have asked what are the top five pieces of evidence you know about in this case or something more open ended. But open ended questions take time to analyze. We have not done one with a gag order. In that case it seems like the consultant, attorney and Court should have had input.
I guess Edelman, the expert hired for the survey, doesn’t have any weight on this. Just the lawyers and the judge, who ARE NOT experts. AT offered his testimony right then and there, but JJJ was not interested. What a mess.
@@DazyGo not all jury consultants are equally skilled
@@ValeskaTruax Absolutely. So, I got curious and looked his company up. Twenty years experience, works with all manner of surveys on various subjects. Government contracts too. Seems reputable.
@@DazyGo well I guess what I would say is that the Defense attorney said she didn't know if Edelman knew there was a non-dissemination order. If he DID know that he should not have written questions that imparted all that information and evidence to the survey respondents who are in the Moscow jury pool. Because it doesn't take an expert to figure out.
Then, a couple of people went to the prosecution and asked them about the questions, NOT the defence!! So this PROVES BIAS
Try taking a deep breath before you type things out.
@@52Tmacfan 😂😂😂 I’m quite calm actually! Just disagreeing :) it’s my right
I was under the impression that the recipient of the survey called the police, not the prosecution. Then the police told the prosecution.
I was under the impression that the recipient of the survey called the police, not the prosecution. Then the police told the prosecution.
@@deannamcmurtrey5794 They apparently went straight to prosecution
It’s exactly like his survey in college!😮
Not everyone watches the news. I don't. These questions were absolutely crossing the line and creating false bias to et what they want in the end. The trial moved. She should have approved the questions and with her saying, I knew we were going to be here, and this is what would happen... the knew the questions were crossing the line.
Until now, I thought the defense was sharp and reasonable. Now I think she is sharp and unreasonable. She does not see the forest for the trees. She just put out misinformation to public after crafting a non- dissemination order. Plus she offended the judge. I lost a lot of respect for her.
She said she's in contact constantly with the prosecution, acting like she's playing fair & and then it is sly goes behind everyone bk.
Yes I agree. Shadeee
I now think Anne Taylor was a grandstanding all along.
The survey questions were no accident in my opinion. I never particularly liked her. Sure I’ve raised my eyebrows at some of what the prosecution has said, but every time she speaks I’m shocked by the disrespect and the squirrelly changing of subjects and distraction tactics. But even with all of that, I think she thinks her client is guilty too. Did you hear her tone when she gave a subtle laugh/sigh and said “it’s my job to defend my client.” She knows. She knows. And she still has the nerve to be disrespectful. Gross.
@@lifeonmakeup6458 💯
Those poor families and friends of the victims. stay strong.
Peter is so agree about the questions being to specific and revealing; your kind of questions are much broader and get to the point.
They MUST get a change of venue for this case. All you have to do is look at the local social media posts (as well as national), with 90 percent wishing bodily harm on the defendent, to know that he would never get a fair trial there...and at this point, not sure which county would provide that. UGH.
There is places where that can happen, but the prosecutor is against. He is a vile man.
There is horrific case all across USA every day & is high profile in that town & the locals are jurors this is not a case so different from hundreds of other cases
Judge stalled didn't stop her and ordered a hearing quickly ... she's being heard now.
Great work. Thank you, Peter!!!⚖️
I used to be one of those persons who wondered how anyone could be a defense lawyer. Age, experience, and lawyers like you and Bruce Rivers have given me reasons to respect and understand your passion. Godspeed to all the innocent defendants and their counsel. There are good and bad characters in every profession.
I still do not understand how something like this can happen without the direct permission of the court and subsequent discussion among relevant legal representatives to decide when, how, where, and what will be on the surveys. Isn't this censurable activity? Assuming each potential person surveyed heard all or even some of the questions, NOW these individuals are potentially tainted as jurors. What happened to voir dire?
If I were the judge after those questions I absolutely would not move that trial. The defense is trying to force and manipulate the judge here! They
, the defense just tried Koberger!
The judge doesn’t want trial moved, because he would rather not travel….talk about Bryan getting a fair trial do to that
Btw it’s Kohberger
I live in Spokane, which is about 45 minutes from Moscow. Everybody knows Bill 😒 and Ann has an amazing reputation as a solid lawyer. These two have spent more time throwing their knowledge of Law around with no forward progress on this case. This isn't even close to justice. I can't imagine it will get any better. It's embarrassing that we're not even close to a trial. I feel so much for the families. It's unfair.
You must be driving at some ungodly speeds without any traffic or stopping. 90 minutes is more likely
I live in Sokane as well. It's more than a 45 minute drive.
Unfair puts it mildly... Wish I could give my opinion of BK and what he is doing in jail and manipulating this case, as is defense .
Totally Breaks my Heart for the Families.
Numerous attorneys have stated that it's not unusual for high profile cases to take this long, including this one is believe.
Unfair will be BK not having a fair trial. We think he is guilty, but he isn’t. The fo$(& survey or the questions are already everywhere. The trial must to move to china, but it is a shame that they are fighting to keep there. The prosecutor ego is unbelievable.
Change of venue is a must. This trial and county don't strike me as overly fair. Truth is, the questions encompass what the media has said. If you have ever lived in a small town, word travels fast. It's unlikely at this point that a majority of potential jurors have heard the media rumblings.
This is beyond ridiculous how Ann Taylor is looking for any avenue to keep pro longing this trial?? Its very clear what she's doing with all these delays??? And the judge way too passive and allowing her to do whatever she wants to keep pushing out this trial? The judge needs to be more firm and be in control and put his foot down already and get this trial started. My heart goes out to all the families of the 4 victims having to go through all these delays over and over when they have been patiently waiting for 2 years to get this trial started? Brian is 1000% GUILTY and no matter where they change venues it won't matter!! Anyone who thinks hes innocent hasn't been watching this case closely at all as i have from day 1 there's no way he didn't do it!!! His own family believes he may have been involved they know he had severe mental problems and everything points against him with no alibi driving by the victims house many many times his cell phone pings at the victims house at times of the murders he purchased the same knife that was used to kill the 4 students on Amazon his DNA on the knife sheath his moving trash around to a neighbors garbage can he was following one of the victims believe it was Maddy on social media there is just so much evidence against him if he was innocent he would shout it out and have an alibi bottom line but he doesn't because he did it!! He will definitely get convicted then be on death row for another 20 years as his attorneys will look to keep appealing once hes on death row and still dragged out but at least he'll be locked away for life!!! He's absolutely evil to do what he did and for what reason to butcher 4 young kids??? What did they do so bad to deserve that other than one of them may have rejected him??? He's absolutely evil in a very quiet way but they arrested the right man and now he needs to finally be convicted!! If they surveyed me i would be Brian is 1000% guilty!!! No doubt about it!!! Common sense!!
Hasn't Ann Taylor wasted time doing this survey in the first place
Yes, especially since a fair hunk of the people living there right now won't be by the time the trial gets anywhere near started. You know, since a fair amount of them will probably be done with school and going back home by then...
The e judge told her to provide evidence of bias for the venue change motion as so she did. How else to asses the extent if bias if not via survey? That’s how it’s been done
She did this all on purpose I think, to get her venue change. She should be held in contempt of court!
So how do you suggest they find out if the county is biased?
Rewatch Crew today. I saw this yesterday with EDB. Some of those questions are ridiculous! They provide too much info. Ann Taylor was really rude.
EDB is biased as a past prosecutor.
Defense attorney was rude? In EDB opinion? How about honest? Truth hurts! Good. She is not beholden to judge or elections for her career. She is doing her job. Look out peeps- heres an attorney just doing the job for client!
People need to critcally think for themselves- not just repeat what others say, IMO.
I agree.
Bootlickers
And unprofessional!
I heard all the questions - but coz I been following ... none of that accertains beyond reasonable doubt - they are arguably biased in nature and one could easily determine (as many have) that this is indeed the only evidence required for a guilty verdict.
Its not the queations themselves because thats out in the public ... its HOW they are framed !!
I think they could have been done better and will now require totally being redone in order to get approriate q's and comparisons.
Have you heard?
Well now I have 🤦♀️ idiots
I believe the defense needs to provide a complete list of all people called and exactly what each of their responses were!
What’s that gonna do know? Considering BT aka prosecution put the questions out to millions of people
So excited to watch this video!! I was hoping you would! You're the best!
here's what a survey question could be - have you hear or read anything about the Bryan Kohberger trial? If no, survey ends. If your answer is yes, go to next question. Have you heard or read what Kohberger is accused of or charged with? If answer is yes, what have you read or heard he is accused of or charged with? BTW there is such a thing as an ex parte interim order, that preserves status quo, until a hearing can be held. So interim order on Friday afternoon, with hearing on Monday morning, is appropriate IMO.
She’s complaining about weighing in and be heard? We hear her all the time. She’s arguing over not being heard yet she was agreeing on things Judge signed off on…I don’t get the waste of court time she is using and money.
Her issue is she wasn't allowed to go set the counties on fire while this was debated. She's mad the judge told her to stop, we need to discuss if setting the counties on fire is needed before you do it.
HI Peter! I watch all the time. I'm a capitol mitigation specialist in Indiana. I just want to say this is common in capitol defense training. The Colorado Method and Death Penalty training teaches to get all the bad facts right out in the open. Maybe that's the strategy. I don't fully know how it doesn't hurt them in the future. The surveyer definitely should have sent her the questions before sending it though. It's so interesting. It's definitely common in capitol work. I'm sure the company they used to do these is trained this way. It's just rare to those who aren't capitol qualified/trained
Interesting. I had a feeling these were pretty normal questions in regards to these surveys which are rare in and of themselves. I wish Anne Taylor would have had the expert explain the reasoning because everyone's making it out that this is so out of line. This expert has done these surveys in Idaho before. I can't imagine he's just going to throw his reputation away for nothing.
I feel like open-ended questions would be more helpful for finding out the opinions of the potential jurors. Giving the answer within the question is blatantly influencing the respondents imo.
i'm sorry but i think a capital mitigation specialist should know how to spell it, but maybe it's an auto-correct problem?
@@petertorvik8413 fair enough
Well, we know all the questions, it was in the media for a long time.
Greetings from the UK 🇬🇧
I find it extraordinary that all parties concerned are not taking into account that regardless of what the established newspaper and news networks in specific counties run with, social media is both a national AND international medium! So it would be extraordinary that no potential juror ANYWHERE had not heard about this case.
BUT the whole point of a trial is that the accused is either convicted or not on the charges made against them based on the facts as established before them during the trial.
It’s irrelevant what ‘facts’ local news networks or the local press run with. It’s also irrelevant what ‘facts’ social media discusses.
A trial is based on the jury convicting OR not the accused solely on the evidence presented before them. NOTHING ELSE.
And whilst the jury should remember that, so too should the lawyers involved - both the prosecution AND the defence.
What is uncomfortable and concerning about this case is the seeming ‘tit for tat’ actions and retorts displayed by both the prosecution AND the defence. Taylor’s narrative for example, in a few of these court broadcasts have sounded manipulative and appear to have been presented in such a way, purely because cameras for public viewing are present in the courthouse.
Jurors or potential jurors would/should be more concerned about that, as opposed to the hearsay broadcasts made by local newspapers, local news networks, or social media - who may/may not have their own agendas.
We did this yesterday with Emily live and I really would like your take on why and Taylor argued with the judge so much. Was she implying that it’s a good old boys club between the prosecution in him because she could’ve made her point and settled things in a peaceful manner, it just didn’t make sense to me because I’ve really respected her until I listened to her argue in circles for no reason
It damn sure looks like a good ol' boys club from where I'm sitting. Imo, the judge sees he and Thompson as in this together. I think she's tired of it and I don't blame her.
She’s right to call out the judge on his bias cause he is biased
What bothers me is that she is making a big deal out of her work delayed, due process, etc. and does not seem to be as bothered about the specific, leading questions she (apparently) just found out were being asked. The surveyor thinks this qualifies as an argument to move the trial so she got the answer she was looking for. I'm horrified at this. I think it already shows poor judgment by her in trying this case and I'm already disappointed in the Quality Of The Trial that has not even begun.
I think asking these questions and people say no then have to yes in court will make them have to change venues
Wtf?!?!?!?!?! So even if these “potential jurors” hadn’t heard about the case, they have NOW!!!!! I think they’re PURPOSELY trying to show that too many ppl know about the case so it helps them be able to change the venue 🤬🤬🤬
Completely agree that the way the questions were asked is way out of line.
The questions are literally based on what the state had disclosed to the public and some media rumors the state has done nothing about lmao wtf if the prosecutor wants to whine about jury tampering he should not have released PCA that the media have built their slanted campaign on.
This defense atty is teetering on the brink of:
1. Desperation
2. Complete manipulation of the system and the public. Shameful while showing cards for the case....0
The prosecution did more harm than she did
Tainting an entire community in order to get a change of venue is absolutely disgusting and unprofessional. Taylor should know better but then again, she needs all the help she can get to get anyone to sympathize with her client.
She is so arrogant. Disrespecting and talking over the judge. SMH.... I am so glad the judge put her in her place. I totally agree with the judge. The way the survey was done and questions that were asked. Apparently Taylor doesn't get it. She is still arguing even when she is wrong.
Everyone in that county had already heard about the case. Be for real. Even Thompson said so at the previous hearing, but now he is whining about cause of the non-existent blissfully ignorant ones. The questions are literally based on what the state had disclosed to the public and some media rumors the state has done nothing about lmao wtf if the prosecutor wants to whine about jury tampering he should not have released PCA that the media have built their slanted campaign on. He has been tainting the jury pool for over a year.
Yup I actually hate her whinny voice ewww
As someone who lived in that area and had a family member attend school there during the events, my opinion is the area is very biased against the defendant. However, you can't rely on rumors and word of mouth as evidence to prove that so the surveys make sense. The wording of the survey could've been better though.
Keep up the explanatory docs!
She’s driving me crazy.
Me too.
The prosecutor is hypocritical and misogynistic and shady. The judge is biased af. They are both desperate to do it in Latah because the prosecutor controls the jury pool. It says they think he cannot be convicted under a fair trial.
I dont know what it is about AT, but she rubs me the wrong way....
Good!
She’s a slime ball
Take control of your court judge!!
As a forensic psychologist who’s done jury consulting and I am an expert in developing scientific surveys within and outside of the criminal Justice system, I can tell you that these questions are HORRIBLE -the wording of the questions themselves violates a number of very fundamental principles and guidelines required for ANY AND ALL VALID SCIENTIFIC SURVEYS. Whomever wrote these questions SIMPLY CANNOT BE A SCIENTIST POSSESSING A Doctoral degree in ANY FIELD OF PSYCHOLOGY (e.g., social, forensic, criminal, clinical, counseling, etc.) OR SOCIOLOGY. Even a graduate student working on their master’s degree in ANY field of psychology or
in sociology! IMPO, this awful survey and I’ll bet their sampling design as well as how they administered the ‘survey’ itself are also so poor and pathetic that no valid conclusions can be drawn from it.
The irony of Kohberger being a doctoral student and being okay with these questions is crazy