Real Lawyer Reacts: Wait.. So Kohberger Is Allowed To Contact Potential JURORS? Judge allows survey!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 кві 2024
- #lawyeryouknow #universityofidaho #moscow #idaho4
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
Had the Judge taken out those 2 questions, he would have basically been saying that the only way a potential juror can become prejudiced is by actual true facts but not by false facts that have been disseminated by any other source including the News, Social Media or everyday things such as gossip. A potential juror can be prejudiced by ANY information they hear, read or see about this case. Trying to limit the juror poll to only actual true facts in which everything besides what came out in the Probable Cause Affidavit is sealed, is just idiotic at best.
I completely agree, well said 🤘
Or you could just poll jurors without specifically divulging the most damaging and prejudicial facts or rumors and find those people who know almost nothing at all about the case…
@@UnfilteredMind They are trying to find if there are enough of those people with this survey. People who know nothing about the case dont get to do the survey. Only people who know something about the case get to do the survey.
Only voir dire isnt enough to weed out some people in really public cases like this. People forget they know stuff in the case and with asking specific things that have been reported by the media and widespread on social media they get around that.
Defence is trying to possibly prove that to many people know facts of the case and that they want to move it. So they will also be doing the same check in the other counties to see if there is an difference.
@@UnfilteredMind That really does not work very well though. As the guy talked about while on the stand, the more general the question, the less the person will answer. The more details that are in the questions, will result in better remembering for the person answering. Brains are hardwired to better remember fine details than just general information. Just like looking at a building and trying to remember information about it, you will more easily remember a certain type of column, or a sculpted pattern or maybe it might have a revolving front door instead of a push/pull. That is easier to remember than how wide the building is, or how tall, or even what color the outside or roof is. That is just how our brains work.
@@gabriellareid3883 correct! I don't remember stuff unless it's important or appeals to me. And everyone is different!
Bryan is not contacting anyone. The third party expert survey company retained by defense counsel is doing their job. Semantics.
Plus it is a small number of people. They act like it is every person in the state.
The fact that the residents felt the need to call the prosecutor and local police to report the survey question is the main reason why he will not get a fair trial in that county
Ah yes, a few people out of hundreds reporting it shows they are all biased.
In my opinion, that shows honesty and integrity on their part. They wanted the powers that be aware that it was going on. Maybe the people were trying to insure that he could get a fair trial and wouldn't need a change of venue
@@DamionJackson-ie2sxgee do YOU really think that he could? Just maybe knowing now he DID NOT STALK the victims won't change those surveyed minds, but it is somewhat clarifying and one of the State's proclaimed motives for him doing this weaker, no?
@@nomadscavenger I personally don't think his chances at a fair trial are any worse there than anywhere else because this HAS become such a huge news story with an over abundance of coverage on all platforms. Unfortunately it's a sad fact of a social network based world with a 24 hour news cycle that is absolutely rabid to come out with the newest most salacious tidbit regardless of it being based in fact or a piece of pure fiction.
@@nomadscavenger There is no possible way to prove a negative, and people know that.
This decision makes me respect this judge even more. ⚖️
I think the judge 100% got this one right! There is no question about it. The defense should be allowed to find out if the community is bias with whatever information they choose. The judge is taking out 1 of many possibilities for a verdict to be thrown out and the entire trial go for another round. Good call Judge!
But the defense isnt “finding out if the community is biased.”
The survey is “measuring,”with a very poor algorithm, whether or not any of the 400 people who actually took part in the survey, MAY hold certain opinions that the defense concider to be prejudicial or damaging to their client.
Most assuredly, the surveys are putting a ‘worm’ into peoples ear/brain that they can later discuss with their own community and spread that worm further afield, and THOSE people can then discuss the worm with their community, and so on until very large parts of various communities may consciously or unconsciously, develop bias based solely on the questions asked in the survey.
I can’t think of an easier way to spread bias a very long way.
What happened to voir dire? Why aren’t the lawyers weeding out potentially prejudicial jurors during the process of sitting a jury?
@@enigma9605 Not to mention the community spread will disqualify them as potential jurors.
@@j.c.7555
Only if people admit that they have a biased opinion due to what they heard via the survey.
If their bias is subconscious, they may not be aware of how the gossip has affected them.
Bottom line, the survey is a very bad idea if you’re Bryan Kohberger.
I wonder if the State got too emotional with this portion of the hearing not to have the wherewithal that the arguments and the questions being read into the hearing were going to be included in the public record, which if they had the wherewithal would have filed a motion for a closed hearing. Great points made by Judge Judge - and hopefully both sides take more caution with how they move in this trial going forward.
The correct word for delay should be (fair trial) if it takes delays to get all the evidence & to decide on change of venue let it be. Nothing changes the fact that victims are gone. Justice can’t be served by framing BK.
Yes. It's entirely possible that someone else did it, and put BK's DNA at the murder scene. It's also possible that OJ was guilty. Gonna guess the second is more likely than the first.
He was not framed. Give me a break. They didn't even know who he was when the knife sheath was found. Not everything is a conspiracy
@@Michelek65 we don’t know a lot
@@UncleKennysPlaceat the murder scene vs on an object at the murder scene is a big difference, especially with zero evidence to support the person even being there.
As someone who works with DNA on a daily basis, I can say with certainty that there are multiple issues with the narrative being presented.
I'm not suggesting this person was framed.
I have no idea.
But, I do know DNA, and I have multiple concerns about several aspects of their approach and which parts were analyzed.
INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
I like how judge judge is handling the case so far
He hasn’t compelled discovery, he’s not handling anything well.
Judge Judge hasn't handled anything! He and Thompson didn't even understand this survey process. He failed to set deadlines for prosecution to turn over discovery. He allowed Bill Thompson to hold a secret grand jury hearing when defense had a pretrial scheduled with a witness (Bethany Funk) that has exculpatory evidence. Look up what exculpatory evidence is if you don't know. Watch the hearings and see how he favors Bill Thompson and can't make a decision.
But if this is what you think is "doing a good job" so be it
@@brandonman1315Well said!
I believe it was a fair decision due to the fact of the prosecution reading the questions in the court! Thanks Peter for breaking this down! Great job as always!
Andrea Burkhart was right from the jump. Peter you should have her on as a guest!!!
Peter stands just fine on his own!!!
She was wrong. The defense violated the no dissemination order…
Anne Taylor is lucky that she didn’t get sanctioned for misinterpreting what the public record is…
@@UnfilteredMind How, if the expert only used info from the media reporting? The defense didn't give him any information.
@@kristamccurdy5980 Even if he only used media reports. He was hired for by the defense. He is therefore subject to the gag order. The gag order specifically prohibits any attorney or hired agent of an attorney to make any out of court statements that disseminate information about this case that is not part of the Court’s public record of this case.
Two of those questions were not part of the public record.
Think about it this way, what would you say if you found out Bill Thompson hired someone to start calling people around all the other venues Anne Taylor would like to move this case to under the guise of conducting his own “survey” to verify that Anne Taylor’s survey results are legitimate…
Would you not have a problem with the prosecution’s hired agent calling random people up to asking them if they’ve read seen or heard the most prejudicial and damaging evidence & rumors against Bryan Kohberger?
You should, because that would be considered jury pool tampering. It should make no difference which side is tampering with the jury pool because the end result is the same. There will now be more people who know about and can spread the most damaging information about Bryan Kohberger who can then spread that same information/false information to other people. That 1% surveyed ends up being 5% if each person tells 5 other people who then tell 5 other people and so on…
Is HE contacting jurors? Or is the defence polling the jurors to discover potential bias...? Huge difference.
Defense has an expert doing random sampling of approximately 1% of the county population to determine whether there is an unfair bias in the potential jury pool so they can argue for a change of venue if appropriate due to bad media reporting on unsubstantiated rumor.
Exactly. It's an expert that's been hired, both the state and federal governments have utilized the process quite often over the last 50-60yrs at least.
It’s a double edged sword though because now that it is in the public record that means the prosecution can go around surveying people telling them the most prejudicial rumors and facts about this case under the guise of a survey…
And technically they wouldn’t be tampering the with jury pool.
Defense better be careful with this can of worms they just opened. It might come back to bite them in the behind.
I love your insight and how fair you are with your thoughts.
Thanks, Peter.
No matter what a person has heard, knows, or thinks he/she knows, as a juror, he/she should be interested in justice enough to be objective.
If only reality was "shoulds." We try to get close to that with voir dire.
The evidence that the prosecution presents to the selected jury will determine the outcome. The time & place have yet to be determined. I pray that the families of the victims find peace each day of their lives. I pray the victims are in Love & Peace. 🙏
@aprilkepler1702 I pray 🙏 🙏 that you learn the Gospel of our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️...You can read 1st Corinthians 15:1-4 to learn how He died on the Cross ✝️ 🙏 was buried & arose on the 3rd day according to the scriptures...It's through His blood atonement 🙏 ❤ that we ALL are forgiven for our sins 🙏 when we HUMBLY SEEK Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤ for forgiveness 🙏 ❤...Also, we ALL MUST be BORN AGAIN through our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️ to receive eternal salvation/life 🙏 ❤ & then are sealed with the Holy Spirit 🙏 ❤...We can ONLY enter the Kingdom of Heaven by being BORN AGAIN 🙏 ❤ through our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️...I pray 🙏 ❤ & encourage you 🙏 ❤️ along with everyone 🙏 ❤️ to begin to read, study & meditate on the Bible scriptures, the TRUE WORD OF GOD 🙏 ❤ TODAY!!!! I also encourage you & everyone to read the King James Version of the Bible & NOT any of the other versions BECAUSE ALL of the other versions have CHANGED, REMOVED and/or ADDED TO the scriptures which IS MANIPULATING God's TRUE WORD & it's another way of DECEIVING MANY people from God's TRUE WORD...Also, it's NOT about religion or being religious, it's MORE about having a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️ & our Heavenly Father Lord God 🙏 ❤️...Time is running short 🙏 🙏 because the Rapture is NEAR & that's WHY I encourage everyone to HUMBLY SEEK our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️ TODAY 🙏 ❤...Jesus Christ IS the WAY, the TRUTH & the LIFE for NOONE can come to His Father our Lord God EXCEPT for through Him 🙏 ❤...The Rapture is NEAR & once the Rapture happens, the AntiChrist WILL reveal himself & the 7 year tribulations WILL begin 🙏 🙏...During the 7 year tribulations, GOD WILL POUR OUT HIS WRATH UPON THE EARTH & THE PEOPLE WHO REJECTED HIM & WHO TAKE THE MARK OF THE BEAST...I pray 🙏 🙏 & encourage EVERYONE to read the book of Revelation 🙏 🙏 to LEARN of ALL the prophesies of these things 🙏 🙏 & others that will come to fruition 🙏 🙏...But, the MOST important 🙏 ❤️ thing is to HUMBLY SEEK our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️ TODAY to be BORN AGAIN through Him 🙏 ❤ to receive eternal salvation/life 🙏 ❤️ & be sealed with the Holy Spirit 🙏 ❤️...I can TRULY testify that you will become a NEW & CHANGED person & it's the MOST GLORIOUS moment & experience in your ENTIRE life 🙏 ❤...God bless you ALL 🙏 ❤...
Think it is a big win for defense
I am not sure of that. The same judge going to be on the trial with the same allegations. If you not sure of your defence or way to pick the “correct” jurors then you can files motions and appeals hoping something may happen that will effect the case
@@Respectearnednotgivencan you clarify your point?
Are you suggesting that the defense filed this motion, or that they will in the future?
Or did I completely misunderstand that?
@@Holy.HannaH I am addressing the phone surveys as a common in big cases. Both sides do it despite the facts they are not newsworthy…the first we heard about it on the “Media” is during Trump’s hearing to change of venue to I believe more “republican” jury based on phone survey they did and the judge refused. In this case the DA I believe was arguing on the type of the questions that were asked to “potential” jurors and I believe the judge did not buy it.
@@Holy.HannaH that was reply that the def won. If a motion filed by any side to change venue and the judge agreed and the motion granted for the trial to be moved to another location the court wherein that motion was granted will be paying the cost to be moved not only that the same judge also still be on the case regardless of the location (this is general rule)ca courts
@@Respectearnednotgiven None of this was about trying to get rid of the judge, etc.
An expert firm was hired to use a very precise method that has been used across the US, even by the federal govt, for over 50yrs to offer an expert opinion on whether or not they should ask for a change of venue or stay in the current jurisdiction.
So even though the defense hired them, the work is beneficial to both sides.
The prosecution simply didn't want certain questions asked that werent a matter of public record.
However, the prosecution did not file the hearing under seal and so the prosecutor himself made the questions public.
Therefore those questions remain on the survey, and the prosecution ended up making a fool of themselves and wasting everyone's time.
I think that's a major reason why this person feels like it was a win for the defense.
And because the prosecution are the ones behaving like a scared floundering defense.
If the prosecutor had been sure of himself rather than so emotionally flustered he would have either requested the hearing be sealed or do as the defense did and not reveal in open court exactly what he himself didnt want revealed.
Personally, I dont understand why the prosecution had a problem with it, I think any expert work that benefits both sides is beneficial.
Especially if it prevents further delays down the road.
These questions came directly from thousands of media reports and commentary. They weren't made up out of nowhere. It also got the court to admit a portion of the PCA is misleading at best (stalking)
The survey expert also knows his stuff. He's worked for both prosecution and defense, and in high profile cases like the Floyd case, and Oaklahoma City bomber case. I'd love to hear more from him about his career!
Wonder if Lawyer Lee will use this in her class tonight, she’s a quest speaker tonight covering the media and social networking impact on trials? Going live for her members.
this is gonna backfire on the defense
Yes it is.
You know what they say, play stupid games, win stupid prizes
Thanks Peter! I could not understand it with out your program.
What is the worst that could happen if the case were given a change of venue? Jurors can only deal with the facts presented before them. So why waste time doing a survey? Furthermore, finding people who have heard nothing about this case are far and few between. I am in Canada and have a good overview of the case.
I hope the jurors will certainly be more peers than a bunch of older random folks.
Hello Peter! Thank you for this update and your expertise! A win for the defense, but they get to be very careful moving forward! Judge Judge knows exactly what he’s doing! 😮
Thank you Peter for explaining this whole process to all of us. 💗 Between your discussion on the hearing about this survey and Judge Judge’s ruling, I have learned a lot and I always value your insights and expertise. 💞
Thanks!- Charles Marinaro!❤
On the rewatch crew this afternoon. This case gets crazier every month that goes by. Peter, you made me chuckle when you said something like judges judge and I thought, “so Judge Judge judged!” Thank you for keeping us informed and explaining what the heck they’re doing! “So boom *snap* all of those are part of the court record,” lol. You keep it entertaining, too.
A win for the prosecution! The defense fought so hard for this, we know they want a change of venue. Whatever, if it makes them feel its going to be a fair jury, what does it matter..
Now they cant say a juror isnt fair. Like you said they cant use it as a shield, or a weapon!
I think the defense is all about sewing confusion and getting a mistrial.
Thanks for this, I now understand the survey move, and appreciate your explanations
No one I know is following this trial, but the second I say the quadruple homi at the collage in Idaho, they immediately know what I’m talking about. He’s going on have a hard time getting anyone with no opinion on the case. That being said, if the facts aren’t there, I believe people will do the right thing. I think he’s guilty, but if the trial comes and the facts just aren’t there, I would change my mind, and think most decent people would. They’re buying time in my opinion.
I agree and disagree with you. You should believe in the law innocent until proven guilty. You said you believe he is guilty without hearing any actual factual evidence there for you should of said he is innocent. Until the evidence comes out in trial that may change your mind or may not change your mind. He's innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The opinion of the public is the problem without seeing any factual evidence that may or may not be used against the defendant
@@DG-os8ss100%
@@brandonman1315 4 sho FACTS 💯
@@DG-os8sswe do know some of the evidence though. Not all for sure, but some. Just basing the opinion on what is known so far. We all do have the right to an opinion based on what we know.
@@jennifersmith6912 that's the problem with the world today basing a opinion on something you don't know anything about. We seen 1% of the evidence you can't make a logical opinion on that. Fake news media puts out false narratives and y'all run with it and believe anything the media puts out. The media lie all the time y'all gotta remember that they are called fake news for a reason. It's all made up fabricated to make it look good for clicks and views and y'all believe it and run with it. It's ashame this generation believe everything they see or read on the Internet and TV that's a huge issue open y'all eyes 👀👁️ you are being manipulated into believing something that isn't factually correct. That's the issues I have. Every American should have the same issue if you have any common sense which I understand isn't so common these days 🤔....... MIC DROP 🎤🎙️
Thank you!!! You’re the best!!
Thanks for great explanation!
Imo Judge Judge threw Kohberger a bone.
Or a brick, depending on what he knows that we don't? Absolutely a mystery for us.
Shades of Judge Ito?
I recently visited with several siblings from different State’s.
6 out of 7 are not interested in any on going trials or horrendous crimes.
No interest at all. I asked if they’d serve on a jury.
Yes…they are all retired.
I agree. I mean I live in Texas, but other than ‘yeah, I think I heard about that, I’m the only one that knows much about
Peter, thanks for the coverage! As you were reading this, I thought the same thing as far as what you said about the Judge’s decision. If this is what you want to do, so be it. Here’s the rope let’s see what happens. Be careful what you wish for; you asked for it. Sometimes you gotta learn the lesson the hard way! Judge Judge knows what he’s doing. On a side note: I’ll be in Tampa next week. Any restaurant recommendations for Tampa on our first night? Thanks again!!!
Well the fact that certain population has seen, heard or read this or that foesn't mean that this population agrees with the content seen, heard or read.
The questions assume that one would absorb an opinion from the media instead of judging the facts by themselves.
If he assumes that the population cannot have a critical thinking by itself, this population is not fit for ANY case, regardless of knowing of having heard, seen or read.
If they think calling people on the phone in three different counties to tell them the most damaging and prejudicial evidence & rumors against Bryan Kohberger is beneficial to them, then they only have themselves to blame if this strategy blows up in their face.
It’s a double edged sword though because now that it is in the public record that means the prosecution can go around surveying people telling them the most prejudicial rumors and facts about this case under the guise of a survey…
And technically they wouldn’t be tampering the with jury pool.
Defense better be careful with this can of worms they just opened. It might come back to bite them in the behind.
Defense is creating a self inflicted injury they won’t be able to cure if their survey does more harm than good.
The defense only wanted to take a calculated risk by tainting 1% of the population just so they could get their venue changed but now the prosecution got to give the most damaging evidence and rumors against Bryan more air time than the defense ever planned for.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
The only person that suffers by even more people being aware of all these details is Bryan Kohberger.
IMO defense won a small prize with being allowed to continue the survey but they are going to end up losing the battle if they continue taking risks like this and giving the prosecution center stage to blast out sound new bites of the most damaging evidence that then gets renewed media interest and further & further promulgated to the masses…
Pretty soon defense could try to move this case to Timbuktu and it wouldn’t even make a difference.
Judge is definitely looking ahead. This could be an issue on appeal.
I missed the livestream 😍 hope everyone has had a great day!!
Thanks as always!
re: survey resolution, I thought at the very least the survey would go forward BUT the questions would have to be approved by the Court. I mean, what are their weekly Wednesday meetings for if not to monitor and filter this stuff?? Amazing JJ gave it all away.
Peter, FYI lawyer Lee is having a live tonight at 7 PM about the law and social media I think it'll be really interesting. Maybe something you might want to catch. Thanks for the great insight today, you're the best🎉
Thanks, I'm checking Lee out for her views.
The defense expert went out of his way to not say those questions on the record until the State basically forced him to do it.. Seemed he was far more concerned about trying to protect the integrity of this case than the state was.
Well the questions were sent to the potential jury already so what is the point of not saying them on the record?
@@Clau574. Agreed! How is asking the questions among the public “protecting” the case info? lol….
@@Clau574 They weren't sent to the potential jury. This was a limited telephone poll.
@@MichaelOnines There is only 40,000 people in Latah County, that includes children and the aged. Children under 18 can't serve, and generally the aged can't serve, so how large is the jury pool actually. Also note Latah County includes part of the richest farming area in America. Farmers can't be put into a jury pool at the greatest time of growing crops. So what is the actual size of a potential jury pool? No where near 40,000, say 15,000, and 400 hundred phone calls now become a much greater problem!, almost 3 percent of the actual jury pool.
@@mardenmull525 it is the size required to be statistically valid, and potential hardship excusals were not used as the screening criteria, only eligibility criteria (felony convictions, non-citizen, minor), so that limitation on jury pool is not relevant. Even if it approaches 5% if it shows the local area is impossibly contaminated and supports a venue change it is worth it. The judge made very clear the defense cannot use its jury contacts to add to the measured contamination from the poll results as some sort of bumper to their change in venue motion.
REPLAY, crew, here! Glad to hear, "What's up everybody?" It makes me smile...Every! Single! Time!
I hope you will follow the case in Michigan of the dui accident at a children’s birthday party. The arrangement yesterday was wild and you take on the case would be great.
I’ve seen some people cheering the Judges action allowing the survey, believing that it’s a ‘win’ for Kohberger.
I beg to differ. Continuing the surveys WILL spread bias by putting a ‘worm’ in potential jurors ears, who will then go on to discuss the survey that they took, with family, friends and colleagues. They of course, will go on to discuss the survey with THEIR friends, family and colleagues, who will go on to discuss the survey…
Perfect way to ‘taint’ a huge number of people.
Also, if anyone really believes that moving the actual trial a few miles away will be a good way to find an unbiased juror pool, they are mistaken.
While there is no truth in the statement that this case is of concern to everyone on the globe, I’m sure that all Idahoans know about the murders, and pretty sure that people in surrounding States also know of the case and will have an opinion concerning the defendant and his innocence or guilt.
Isn’t it the lawyers jobs to weed out people with bias one way or another when sitting jurors during the voir dire process?
It's always seemed unfair to me that the PCA gets to be put out and law enforcement gets to have press conferences declaring why they feel the defendant is guilty, but the defense doesn't get to lay out why they think he's not guilty,they only get to deny the allegations.
Also, the state wanted the defense expert to declare the questions they took issue with were false, which to me would give the impression that all the other questions were "true". Just because something is in a PCA doesn't automatically make it "true".
Exactly. Like stalking. Completely false yet the state put it in the PCA anyway
Yep.
@@willbeard4835The PCA doesn’t say he stalked one of the victims
@@UnfilteredMind it literally does contain the word stalking
@@pappa_rodger but it does not say that he stalked any of the victims, does it? Don’t play dumb.
Thanks Peter for the awesome breakdown on this. You do a better job then some tv legal experts do. I didnt know about this till this premiere. I think Judge Judge is a good judge. I think this is a case damned if you do damned if you dont. I think the Judge was also looking at the possiblity if he didnt do this this would be a reason for Anne Taylor to 'file an appeal'. The thing is the attroney for Bryan wasnt the reason why this wouldnt start till March 2025. The University of Idaho was demanding that this dont go on during the school year cause of the pr hit this has taken to the school. I wouldnt say this was a win. The win was when the school demanded to have the crime scene tore down.
This will make jury selection very interesting!
I always thought that jurors are not allowed to talk to each other, to anyone, much less defendant. Shocking
The defense is smart and so is K. Nice video
I dont view this as a win, it is nothing more or less than allowing the defense to do their jobs after an unnecessary delay. The prosecutor honestly needs to publically apologize to the defense and their expert for the misrepresentation of the defense work and their impugnment of the intent and character of the defense and their expert on their precious public *court* record
Thank you
Hello Peter & everyone 👋🏼
Intimidation. Right here.
Jury bias due to speculation can go both ways. Lots of talk on social media about how he couldn't have done this crime, even though those people also don't know all the evidence in this case yet. Only the real evidence will be seen during the trial.
The problem is that the defense has presumed innocence, the two sides don’t start neutral.
@@brandonman1315then it wouldn’t matter who read seen or heard 💩
All they need to focus on are the people who don’t know 💩
14:00 Yes, very interesting!!
100% ❣
It feels like this case will never get to court x
I don't see this trial happening in Mosco.
Thank you so much for this run down, although I’m more worried than ever about Judges like Judge Fran Gull in Indiana. She seems to be quite the opposite of Judge Judge.
I think the defense is doing everything just to move the trial. They'll worry about the rest later.
They should.
She knows she’s screwed so she’s doing a whole lot of tap dancing focusing on everything else except PROVING her client’s alibi (not just bluffing about it). She is doing everything she can to delay having to set a trial date come September when all the discovery is due and she can no longer do this song and dance about waiting for discovery. She knows once those evidentiary hearings start taking place that she won’t be able to continue this charade.
Replay crew here! Great breakdown ⛳️
Peter, Will this not influence jury selection immensely, as jurors are not supposed to have preconceived or bias opinions before a trial?
I think that major point of reassurance was that the remaining counties are only going to have 400 people polled
I think they are bigger, ADA county for sure is WAY bigger, and 400 people is like nothing. He was worried they were going to do 1% of each county.
Preconceived notions or biases are meaningless; the question is: can the juror make a *new* decision, based solely on the evidence presented at trial?
No people if they say they have a bias on this case they can not be a jour period 💯.
@@UncleKennysPlaceNo, bias IS important especially if a potential juror states they believe he is already guilty. It’s not able to be rehabbed. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
@@UncleKennysPlaceAgain, you’re wrong.
I agree with that from now forward. They can continue then making the questions. But for the time before his decision, will he add to the record that the defense did violate the dissemination order?
No. He already threaded that fine line alluding to the fact they may have the right to explore this within the bounds of his order before the questions were read into the court record.
No, because they didn’t.
😤😡 I Miss ALL Yr lives!
Damm that time difference lol! Replay crew here! 💖from UK!
Win for the defense, but could backfire if venue is not changed…
Judge Judge gives AT what she wants most often if not always .
It's weird that your talking like this is personal or has to do with taking sides rather than having anything to do with the law.
Then why doesn’t she have the discovery? You’re a joke.
#replay - is JJ also sending a warning to the DEF? He may not allow them to excuse a juror who only knows the information from the survey because of the survey.
I think the survey issue is problematic either way the dice are rolled if we are looking at it in terms of a post conviction relief appeal.
If he doesn’t let them continue the survey, then they might be able to bring this up on appeal and get a future conviction overturned.
If he does let the survey continue (which he is), Bryan Kohberger may later turn around and claim ineffective assistance of counsel claiming that his own attorneys unfairly prejudiced him in multiple venues even after being cautioned and temporarily halted by the judge and that they ignored that urge of caution and continued on with this prejudicial survey anyway, thereby interfering with his rights for a fair trial in that venue-and might get his conviction overturned based on that.
you are biased
Peter, what comes next for George Kelly, the 77-yoAZ rancher? He got a mistrial verdict today. The numbers were 7-1 for a Not Guilty. Can you espouse on this? Thanks!
Thank you. I just asked about him also.
They need to let that guy go.
@@WyattRyeSway Yup, just what we need, a bunch of old farts playing vigilantes with their ak's running around
@@gorak9000 he’s a rancher. Ofc he’s going to have a rifle! 🤦🏻♀️
@@gorak9000 Ignorance isn't pretty. An AK or AR is not nearly as powerful as a real hunting rifle. And there's little "vigilantism" at all.
Admittedly this may initially feel like a "huge win" for the defense and conversely a huge loss for the prosecution. However, cooler heads always prevail, and as such, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that had defense been denied this avenue of investigation in the pursuit of ensuring their client has the opportunity to be heard by a jury of his peers with an unbiased opinion of the case, but more importantly, the accused, as is realistically possible in such a high profile case , it would undoubtedly be used as a major trojan horse with which to over turn the verdict on appeal.
As frustrating as it may be, I'd much rather minimise every conceivable avenue of appeal as is lawfully possible BEFORE the trial starts, as opposed to going back after the fact and risk losing the hard fought for, desired verdict that was secured. Prevention is always better than cure.
The defense asked for a change of venue because of likely bias. The way to show that is through the survey. Understandable.
However, I'm sure everybody has heard or read about that case nationally. So, where is safe?
Regardless of the change of venue, it's the evidence that will either secure a conviction or not.
The jury is the finder of facts, so who is anyone to say that these questions provide 'false facts'.
I've felt for a long time that there would be no justice in this case. That's why I can't watch much of it.
The challenge to get 400 responses (a valid sample size), you need to call 40,000 numbers because most people don't answer calls from unknown callers....!
Your thumbnail is inaccurate. They are members of the public who are in the potential jury pool. That's different from jury members.
A win for the defense but NOT a "BIG WIN"!
The win will depend on jury Voir Dire
Observation: Koh contends the survey process will get him a change in venue, based on media coverage biasing the jury pool. I feel the Questionaire does the same thing, so the Judge is letting them. Most of any damage is already done, so a finish in 2 counties probably won't change many actual outcomes. I am compelled by the arguments this data will generate.
I thought that the judge was very reassured that there weren’t going to do 1% of the total populations of the other counties. That it was just going to be 400 people of the other counties…especially the ADA county which is massive.
I find it strange that AT once said she had 400 witnesses to interview but those people were not willing to talk to her. I wonder if it was the same 400 that were surveyed.
Well that can’t be true, because there’s another 800 to be contacted in 2 other counties making the total 1200.
@@QueenVee80 yes but there were 400 in Moscow.
@@glennatrogdon6507
They also weren’t “interviewed”, they were surveyed by a 3rd party. She also made that statement before the surveys started, meaning she’d have no way of knowing if 400 people would take the calls.
She’d be referring to people entirely different. There’s 4 victims - friends, family, frats, sororities, people at grub truck, employees at grub truck & corner club, door dash, Eric Gower, people identified at the frat party, Dylan and Bethany, anyone all four of them came in contact with in the maybe 48 hours before the crime. People identified by way of the tips that came in. I imagine it would all add up, and I can see a lot of those people not wanting to cooperate
It’s a potential of up to 400 witnesses, and no the 400 people surveyed in Latah County isn’t the up to 400 potential witnesses that AT is referring too.
A WIN for the judge 😅
Peter, I think you're crazy to agree with this. Crazy. The defense is being sneaky and sleazy. Final stop.
No they aren’t, you are a clown.
You’ve made up your mind and think openly displaying it casts aspersions on anyone but you. Ignorance at its finest.
YOU are exactly why this needs to be done. Absolutely nothing about a survey is sneaky, or sleazy. It’s actually standard in cases like this. Grow up.
@@brandonman1315well if the people who were surveyed about the case didn’t know anything about it then, they sure do now. And some of them are probably even googling things about the case after the survey.
@@brandonman1315 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF TRIAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
ASTC is the only professional organization for trial and litigation consultants. Members agree to follow approved standards of practice that have been developed over the 30-plus year history of the organization.
ASTC Professional Code: Professional Standards of Conduct
The standards and practice guidelines for trial consultants’ use of survey research in connection with motions addressed to pretrial juror bias are intended to be consistent with general accepted principles and standards of survey research.
The purpose of these standards, practice guidelines, and commentary is to provide a set of minimum principles for evaluating the quality of public opinion surveys submitted to courts in connection with motions to change venue or other motions addressing the problem of pretrial juror bias.
Trial consultant’s have an ethical duty to provide all services in a manner that will protect the integrity of the jury pool.
All members are required to follow the ATSC’s Professional Code and abide by the Professional Standards set forth herein.
Trial consultants should not participate in, sponsor or conduct survey’s known as “push polls,” which are primarily designed to influence survey respondents opinions in a particular case by presenting systematically biased information. Such surveys are intended to shape rather than measure public opinion.
Conducting a survey for the purpose of manipulating or influencing the opinions of prospective jurors (so called “push polls”) violates the trial consultant’s duty to provide all services in a manner that will protect the integrity of the jury pool.
A change of venue survey is specifically designed to measure community bias and prejudice in preparation for a motion for transfer/change in venue.
Question Wording Guidelines:
Leading and loaded questions should NOT be used.
False facts should not be used to test the accuracy of other responses in venue surveys.
Question Development Guidelines:
Trial Consultants should meet with attorneys to develop questions designed to uncover biases and knowledge of the matter being litigated. Questions designed to measure bias are the most critical and great care should be taken when developing those questions. The bias questions of a change of venue survey should be the same type of questions that could lead to a strike for cause during voir dire.
Thinking of Questions in Edelman’s Survey:
1. Do these questions adhere to the professional and ethical standards of conduct governed by the American Society of Trial Consultants?
2. Are these questions asked in a matter that obeys his ethical duty to protect the integrity of the jury pool by not introducing bias?
3. Are these questions designed to survey respondent’s opinions by presenting systematically biased information (aka “push poll)?
***Push polls violate the trial consultant’s duty to provide services in a manner that will protect (not taint or bias) the integrity of the jury pool.***
4. Does the survey use leading and loaded questions?
5. Are false facts included in the survey?
6. Would these questions be allowed to be asked during voir dire?
Based on the above 6 questions, how would you grade Dr. Edelman’s adherence to the ethical standards and code of professional conduct he must abide by based on the survey he designed for this case?
Expert had seller numbers. Left me with more questions then answers
I think since the judge didn’t modify the questionnaire I’m a little worried about the ‘everyday person’ that doesn’t have time to or is apathetic towards true crime or the Law that surrounds these cases would create a dilemma in a NORMAL trial,But in THIS case, the jury is probably going to be chosen in another county so since the defense was surveying Latah County it won’t effect the trial insofar, as I can guess, anyone in a close enough county is probably paying a little more attention to this particular case & would’ve heard Something About a survey and about something being ‘wrong’ with the questions…
I also think maybe the state WANTED to get this out there so he had them ready into public record.
I do agree it COULD be a win for the defense BUT (big but here!) it COULD ALSO be a win for the state (fingers crossed🤞🏼)
OBVIOUSLY not a good person to be on the jury! Especially since, towards the end of your summary, I kept seeing the Concalves family and thinking how upsetting this probably was for them when they heard this…I also thought of the 3 other families and my prayers were w/ ALL of them!🙏🏻
I’ve lost a daughter, not in this brutal kind of way, OBVIOUSLY Again; I would’ve led w/ that info. Yet still I live w/ the pain everyday…
Thanx Peter for distinguishing in my mind what the Law is.💔
QQQQQ: Protect the jurors from the defendant. Who is doing that if he can contact jurors?
There's no jurors yet, he can contact pretty much anyone on Earth.
He's not contacting anybody, it's an expert company utilizing a procedure that's been used for 50+yrs
Even your wording is dumb. Quit
If they don’t care and feel like it’s best for their client, it could hurt no one but them in the end.
@@Holy.HannaH AMERICAN SOCIETY OF TRIAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
ASTC is the only professional organization for trial and litigation consultants. Members agree to follow approved standards of practice that have been developed over the 30-plus year history of the organization.
ASTC Professional Code: Professional Standards of Conduct
The standards and practice guidelines for trial consultants’ use of survey research in connection with motions addressed to pretrial juror bias are intended to be consistent with general accepted principles and standards of survey research.
The purpose of these standards, practice guidelines, and commentary is to provide a set of minimum principles for evaluating the quality of public opinion surveys submitted to courts in connection with motions to change venue or other motions addressing the problem of pretrial juror bias.
Trial consultant’s have an ethical duty to provide all services in a manner that will protect the integrity of the jury pool.
All members are required to follow the ATSC’s Professional Code and abide by the Professional Standards set forth herein.
Trial consultants should not participate in, sponsor or conduct survey’s known as “push polls,” which are primarily designed to influence survey respondents opinions in a particular case by presenting systematically biased information. Such surveys are intended to shape rather than measure public opinion.
Conducting a survey for the purpose of manipulating or influencing the opinions of prospective jurors (so called “push polls”) violates the trial consultant’s duty to provide all services in a manner that will protect the integrity of the jury pool.
A change of venue survey is specifically designed to measure community bias and prejudice in preparation for a motion for transfer/change in venue.
Question Wording Guidelines:
Leading and loaded questions should NOT be used.
False facts should not be used to test the accuracy of other responses in venue surveys.
Question Development Guidelines:
Trial Consultants should meet with attorneys to develop questions designed to uncover biases and knowledge of the matter being litigated. Questions designed to measure bias are the most critical and great care should be taken when developing those questions. The bias questions of a change of venue survey should be the same type of questions that could lead to a strike for cause during voir dire.
List of Questions in Edelman’s Survey:
1. Do these questions adhere to the professional and ethical standards of conduct governed by the American Society of Trial Consultants?
2. Are these questions asked in a matter that I obeys his ethical duty to protect the integrity of the jury pool?
3. Are these questions designed to survey respondent’s opinions by presenting systematically biased information (aka “push poll)?
Push polls violate the trial consultant’s duty to provide services in a manner that will protect (not taint or bias) the integrity of the jury pool.*
4. Does the survey use leading and loaded questions?
5. Are false facts included in the survey?
6. Would these questions be allowed to be asked during voir dire?
Based on the above 6 questions, how would you grade Dr. Edelman’s adherence to the ethical standards and code of professional conduct he must abide by based on the survey he designed for this case?
I don't understand how they're allowed to continue to prolong the trial as they see fit. Not to mention, the house where the crime occurred was allowed to be demolished too, which is mind boggling to me.
It sounds very much like the judge is saying, hey, if the defense wants to sh00t themselves in their own foot, so be it, I’m not in the position to argue with them about what they think is best for their own client…”
However he did caution them that the “public record” is only what is contained in the Court’s public record and put it in writing that that the defense DID technically violate the non-dissemination order by asking two of those questions-but now that they were discussed in open court, they are now a part of the public record-so he’s basically like, they can go ahead and prejudice whoever they want against their own client, for all he cares!
And I don’t blame him!
If they think calling people on the phone in three different counties to tell them the most damaging and prejudicial evidence & rumors against Bryan Kohberger then they only have themselves to blame if this strategy blows up in their face.
prosecution prejudiced everyone with PCA
@@pappa_rodger the PCA is public in every single adult criminal case in the USA.
I don't know what a fair trail means, this could go on years. Seems like there is more manipulation than a fair trial.
I wouldn't want to be innocent and in jail for years but, I'd take that, knowing I'm innocent and be out free and then been able to sue the heck out of everybody the heck out of some people, lol.
@@Planet_Shelhe wouldn’t get to sue unless he’s wrongfully convicted
Replay hear from rock springs WY
Hi again everyone 😊
Better safe than sorry 😊
I love this comments section and community. It is far different that the other groups of online "law nerds" (liking to make fun of people doesn't make you a law nerd, but whatever).
Peter, is there any way you can give us some insight on the Arizona Rancher trial. Jury came back 3 times hung. It felt like the Judge kept trying to force a verdict.
I don’t think it’s any different than any kind of a variety of information that can be found out in any social media counting the news.
Putting the full survey - complete with the two untruthful questions - out to the potential jurors and now through mass media to the greater public may have the effect of making the ground more fertile for doubt. If "stalking" and "following them on social media" are later clearly shown to be untrue in court, at least one of the twelve jurors may be more likely to think "hmmm, what else is not true here...?"
If the defense believes their expert and proceeds as such and has been warned ahead of time that they can't use this issue against the case, then the defense should be able to do this. And as it seems they very much want to do it, then this is a win for the defense. It's more likely that the close counties to this case are go I ng to be more knowledgeable and, therefore, less fair. But I can tell you nobody I know knows about this case, but of course I and those I've asked all live in two different stats. So can they hop a state to get a fair trial? Or do they have to remain in Idaho. I can also tell you that a lot of very opinionated Californians, mostly conservative, live in Idaho. I know that 4 families I used to know moved there and they are very aware of how public events and news.
These are state charges so must be tried in Idaho.
It’s a double edged sword though because now that it is in the public record that means the prosecution can go around surveying people telling them the most prejudicial rumors and facts about this case under the guise of a survey…
And technically they wouldn’t be tampering the with jury pool.
Defense better be careful with this can of words they just opened. It might come back to bite them in the behind.
I think anything that delays the trial is a win for the defense. I’m not sure it’s as big of a win as the pro-defense crowd is barking. I think it’s a given that the venue will be changed, but I doubt that it will change the end result. Is it too cynical to assert that bias can never be meaningfully mitigated, let alone eliminated? I believe that some people will lie to get on the jury and some will lie to get off it. Honesty is a fluid entity. It comes and goes according to the situation at hand. The art of persuasion trumps facts and evidence. Lawyering is much akin to sophistry. The better rhetoricians are going to win this trial.
I wonder what will happen if they can NOT find a county that is less familiar or bias than Latah.
Then it will probably stay. When you make a COV motion, the first thing they will ask is where else could we go? That is why they wanted to do the surveys in other counties. If it come back that there isn't really any place that is less biased, then it would stay in Latah.
I don't care where the trial is held, but I still think the defense went to far. Doing a survey is fine but adding those specific questions isn't right. If the judge is fine with poisoning a portion of the jury pool, who am I to disagree.
IMHO, this Judge just did a 360 from his original reaction to this survey to potential jurors!!!!!!! I believe it's WRONG, it SHOULDN'T be allowed to be done AT ALL because that's why & what we have the process in place for juror questioning WHEN they come in to possibly be seated for the jury at the time of trial!!!!!!!! This to me makes me think 🤔 that someone 🤔 possibly some person in a POSITION OF POWER has had a behind the scenes 🤔 conversation with this Judge & there IS some kind of LAWLESS, CORRUPTION taking place 🤔 that IS going to INFLUENCE or try to possibly INFLUENCE the hands of JUSTICE ⚖️ 🤔...I NO LONGER TRUST OR RESPECT this Judge!!!!!!!!!! PERIOD!!!!!!! I pray 🙏 🙏 for ALL families of these 4 beautiful, innocent victims 🙏 😢 ❤ who were savagely murdered!!!!!!!! BUT, IF BK is truly guilty of these 4 murders, he WILL FACE TRUE & JUST JUSTICE when he FACES our Heavenly Father Lord God 🙏 ❤️ & our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️... And, he won't be facing just a jail cell, he will be CONDEMNED TO HELL WHERE THERE IS NOTHING BUT SORROW, WEEPING & GNASHING OF TEETH FOR ETERNITY IN THE LAKE OF FIRE 🔥...Unless he confesses to & asks for forgiveness for ALL of his sins HUMBLY 🙏 🙏 to our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️ to be BORN AGAIN through Him & receive eternal salvation/life 🙏 ❤ & be sealed with the Holy Spirit 🙏 ❤️...But, somehow, BK strikes me as such an EVIL 😈 & CORRUPT individual who is a LOST SOUL 🙏 🙏, I'm not sure if he will ever do that OR if he even knows of our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ 🙏 ❤️...I pray 🙏 that he will though 🙏...
Agree
Hey how’s it going