WEBVTT 1 00:00:00.080 --> 00:00:04.040 What's up everyone, and welcome back to the program. So 2 00:00:04.240 --> 00:00:08.400 Judge Judge decided that it was in the best interest 3 00:00:08.480 --> 00:00:11.359 of justice when it comes to Brian Colberger and his 4 00:00:11.480 --> 00:00:15.919 trial to move that trial out of Moscow. Well, in 5 00:00:15.960 --> 00:00:18.519 this episode, we're going to begin taking a look at 6 00:00:18.559 --> 00:00:23.000 the order that turned that venue change from a possibility 7 00:00:23.559 --> 00:00:28.399 into a reality. Case Number CR twenty nine Dash twenty 8 00:00:28.440 --> 00:00:32.840 two Dash twenty eight oh five, the Order granting Defendant's 9 00:00:32.880 --> 00:00:38.240 motion to change venue. State of Idaho Plaintiff versus Brian C. Coburger, 10 00:00:38.759 --> 00:00:43.920 the defendant one introduction. On January thirtieth, twenty twenty four, 11 00:00:44.159 --> 00:00:47.520 Defendant Bryan C. Coburger filed a motion for a change 12 00:00:47.520 --> 00:00:51.600 of venue pursuant the Idaho Criminal Rule twenty one Idaho 13 00:00:51.719 --> 00:00:57.320 Section nineteen Dash eighteen oh one, Article one, Section one, six, seven, thirteen, 14 00:00:57.600 --> 00:01:01.520 and eighteen of the Idaho Constitution. In the fifth, sixth, eighth, 15 00:01:01.799 --> 00:01:07.680 and fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. On February eighth, 16 00:01:07.760 --> 00:01:11.400 twenty twenty four, the state filed an objection to Coburger's motion. 17 00:01:12.239 --> 00:01:15.560 The hearing on Coburger's motion was originally scheduled for June 18 00:01:15.560 --> 00:01:19.959 twenty seventh, twenty twenty four. Thereafter, the party stipulated to 19 00:01:20.040 --> 00:01:23.519 continuing the hearing to August twenty ninth, twenty twenty four. 20 00:01:24.319 --> 00:01:27.799 On July twenty second, twenty twenty four, Coburger filed a 21 00:01:27.840 --> 00:01:31.959 memorandum in support of motion to change venue with various 22 00:01:32.200 --> 00:01:37.159 exhibits attached. The state filed an additional objection on August twelfth, 23 00:01:37.200 --> 00:01:41.200 twenty twenty four, and Coburger filed a reply on August nineteenth, 24 00:01:41.439 --> 00:01:45.680 twenty twenty four, with additional exhibits. A change of hearing 25 00:01:45.760 --> 00:01:49.200 venue was held on August twenty ninth, twenty twenty four. 26 00:01:49.599 --> 00:01:54.319 Colberger was present and represented by Anne Taylor, Elisa Massoth, 27 00:01:54.480 --> 00:01:58.319 and Jay Logsden. The State was represented by William Thompson 28 00:01:58.400 --> 00:02:02.719 Junior and Ashley Jennings Leta County Prosecutor's Office and Ingrid 29 00:02:02.760 --> 00:02:06.640 Beatty in jeff nine, Office of the Attorney General. At 30 00:02:06.680 --> 00:02:10.879 the hearing, defendant presented expert testimony from James Todd Murphy, 31 00:02:11.120 --> 00:02:16.000 doctor Amani L. Aliley, and doctor Brian Edelman and doctor 32 00:02:16.120 --> 00:02:19.560 Veronica to hear. The State did not call any witnesses. 33 00:02:20.039 --> 00:02:22.960 The Court has spent many months carefully considering the legal 34 00:02:23.159 --> 00:02:27.360 and logistical concerns with the trial of this length and magnitude, 35 00:02:27.719 --> 00:02:32.000 carefully reading each submission, listening to each expert, and evaluating 36 00:02:32.039 --> 00:02:36.240 each party's position based upon the totality of factors, Defendant's 37 00:02:36.240 --> 00:02:41.199 motion for change of venue is granted. Background. On November thirteenth, 38 00:02:41.280 --> 00:02:45.479 twenty twenty two, four University of Idaho students Kaylee Gonsalvis, 39 00:02:45.479 --> 00:02:49.719 Madison Mogan, Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin were found deceased 40 00:02:49.759 --> 00:02:53.879 in Gonsalves, Mogan, and Kernodle's off campus home in Moscow, Idaho. 41 00:02:54.960 --> 00:02:57.840 The cause of death for each was ruled as a homicide. 42 00:02:58.520 --> 00:03:01.479 As news of the tragedy broke, media outlets from around 43 00:03:01.479 --> 00:03:08.199 the country descended upon Moscow. As law enforcement investigated, news stations, newspapers, 44 00:03:08.360 --> 00:03:12.360 and social media were flooded with stories and speculations about 45 00:03:12.360 --> 00:03:16.599 the homicides. Throughout the course of the investigation, the Moscow 46 00:03:16.639 --> 00:03:19.879 Police Department, in partnership with the University of Idaho, the 47 00:03:19.960 --> 00:03:24.080 Leta County Prosecutor's Office, and the Idaho State Police, held 48 00:03:24.120 --> 00:03:28.919 press briefings to answer questions and to reassure the public appropriately. 49 00:03:28.960 --> 00:03:32.560 The information released was limited to protect the integrity of 50 00:03:32.560 --> 00:03:37.759 the ongoing investigation. On December thirtieth, twenty twenty two, Coburger 51 00:03:37.840 --> 00:03:40.280 was arrested in charge with four counts of murder in 52 00:03:40.319 --> 00:03:44.240 the first degree and one count of burglary. Again, media 53 00:03:44.280 --> 00:03:48.159 outlets descended upon Moscow, and the news coverage quickly focused 54 00:03:48.360 --> 00:03:52.840 on Coburger. That same day, an order governing courthouse and 55 00:03:52.919 --> 00:03:57.680 courtroom conduct was entered to help alleviate any potential prejudicial photography, 56 00:03:57.879 --> 00:04:02.800 audio or video recordings and interviews within this courthouse. The 57 00:04:02.879 --> 00:04:06.479 conduct order has remained in place throughout the proceedings. Because 58 00:04:06.520 --> 00:04:09.759 of the extensive media coverage from the outset of the homicides, 59 00:04:09.919 --> 00:04:13.000 a non dissemination order was quickly put into place by 60 00:04:13.080 --> 00:04:16.800 stipulation of the parties on January three, twenty twenty three, 61 00:04:17.079 --> 00:04:19.920 to help protect Colburger's right to affair trial by an 62 00:04:19.959 --> 00:04:24.600 impartial jury. The non dissemination order, as amended, has remained 63 00:04:24.639 --> 00:04:28.160 in place throughout the duration of this case. In an 64 00:04:28.240 --> 00:04:31.319 additional effort to help protect Coburger's right to affair trial, 65 00:04:31.560 --> 00:04:35.279 on November seventeenth, twenty twenty three, this court entered an 66 00:04:35.439 --> 00:04:39.079 order removing cameras from the court room. Since that time, 67 00:04:39.160 --> 00:04:42.439 the proceedings have been streamed via the court's YouTube channel, 68 00:04:42.800 --> 00:04:46.120 which in theory allows the public access to the proceedings 69 00:04:46.360 --> 00:04:51.000 while minimizing prejudicial photographs and videos focusing solely on Coburger 70 00:04:51.160 --> 00:04:54.600 and his every move. Despite efforts by the parties in 71 00:04:54.639 --> 00:04:57.720 the court to protect the jury pool from being inundated 72 00:04:57.920 --> 00:05:02.199 with information that is potentially prejudiced and false, extensive media 73 00:05:02.240 --> 00:05:07.360 coverage by mainstream media sources such as newspapers, radio stations, 74 00:05:07.399 --> 00:05:13.199 and television news outlets has continued throughout the state and nationally. Additionally, 75 00:05:13.480 --> 00:05:17.639 and perhaps more challenging, is the ongoing spread of prejudicial misinformation, 76 00:05:17.959 --> 00:05:21.639 rumors and patently false theories of the case on social 77 00:05:21.680 --> 00:05:25.800 media outlets such as Facebook, podcasts, and blogs. And just 78 00:05:25.839 --> 00:05:28.639 to interject real quick, this is why we offer all 79 00:05:28.680 --> 00:05:31.199 sides of the story here on this podcast. We don't 80 00:05:31.240 --> 00:05:33.560 just come here to railroad people. We come here to 81 00:05:33.560 --> 00:05:36.639 get to the truth. There have also been numerous television 82 00:05:36.680 --> 00:05:40.040 shows and documentaries produced about the homicides, and at least 83 00:05:40.040 --> 00:05:43.680 one book has already been published. The parties agree the 84 00:05:43.759 --> 00:05:47.720 case is generated extensive coverage by the media, Internet, slews 85 00:05:47.759 --> 00:05:51.160 and others trying to capitalize on the tragedy, but disagree 86 00:05:51.279 --> 00:05:54.120 on how the court should attempt to remedy this issue 87 00:05:54.199 --> 00:05:57.959 to ensure Colberger is tried by a fair impartial jury. Well, 88 00:05:58.000 --> 00:06:01.040 here's an idea, get rid of the gag order. What 89 00:06:01.079 --> 00:06:03.839 they're doing is blaming everybody else for there being no 90 00:06:03.920 --> 00:06:07.639 information or for their being a lack of good information, 91 00:06:08.279 --> 00:06:10.800 when it's really their own fault. You're the ones who 92 00:06:10.800 --> 00:06:13.040 put the gag order in place. What you think people 93 00:06:13.079 --> 00:06:16.480 aren't going to speculate in some Coburger argues that the 94 00:06:16.560 --> 00:06:19.319 venue must be changed from Lata County to a location 95 00:06:19.600 --> 00:06:23.160 with a larger population that is geographically distant from where 96 00:06:23.240 --> 00:06:27.360 the homicides occurred. The state asserts that a larger juror pool, 97 00:06:27.639 --> 00:06:32.120 extensive juror questionnaires, and vorder are sufficient remedies that will 98 00:06:32.120 --> 00:06:35.079 result in a fair and impartial jury in Layta County. 99 00:06:35.879 --> 00:06:39.319 In addition to the issue of juror prejudice resulting from 100 00:06:39.360 --> 00:06:42.560 extensive coverage of the homicides and Coburger by the media 101 00:06:42.639 --> 00:06:46.160 and others, and the smaller population of Leata County. The 102 00:06:46.199 --> 00:06:49.560 defense also asserts the trial should be moved outside of 103 00:06:49.639 --> 00:06:52.759 Layta County for the convenience of the parties and witnesses 104 00:06:53.040 --> 00:06:56.360 and the interest of justice. The State disagrees that moving 105 00:06:56.399 --> 00:06:59.079 the trial would be in the interest of justice or 106 00:06:59.240 --> 00:07:04.000 convenient to the parties and witnesses. Part three the evidence. 107 00:07:05.079 --> 00:07:08.319 As noted above. At the change of anual hearing, Coburger 108 00:07:08.360 --> 00:07:12.959 presented expert testimony from James Todd Murphy, doctor Amani l Aleiley, 109 00:07:13.360 --> 00:07:18.600 doctor Brian Edelman, and doctor Veronica the hear. Additionally, Coburger 110 00:07:18.639 --> 00:07:22.439 submitted several exhibits depicting news stories, news clips, and social 111 00:07:22.519 --> 00:07:25.879 media posts for this court's review. The state did not 112 00:07:25.959 --> 00:07:29.959 call any witnesses or submit any evidence. The Court will 113 00:07:30.000 --> 00:07:33.639 summarize the key takeaways from testimony offered by each of 114 00:07:33.759 --> 00:07:39.120 Coberger's experts. One James Todd Murphy. James Todd Murphy is 115 00:07:39.160 --> 00:07:43.279 the president of Truscope North America. Truscope provides media monitoring 116 00:07:43.319 --> 00:07:46.600 services that offer information to help understand the impact of 117 00:07:46.639 --> 00:07:50.839 media coverage on a particular community. Truscope looks only at 118 00:07:50.879 --> 00:07:56.160 mainstream media sources such as newspapers and new stations of 119 00:07:56.240 --> 00:07:59.399 the mainstream media coverage and IDAHO of this case, thirty 120 00:07:59.439 --> 00:08:02.480 six percent of that coverage has been within Leata County. 121 00:08:03.040 --> 00:08:06.160 This would include media like the Moscow Pullman Deli News, 122 00:08:06.439 --> 00:08:10.720 Lewiston Tribune, and the television news station out of Spokane, Washington. 123 00:08:11.800 --> 00:08:14.439 Colberger requests this case to be moved to Ada County, 124 00:08:14.680 --> 00:08:17.720 which has thirty four percent of the mainstream media coverage 125 00:08:17.720 --> 00:08:21.959 in Idaho. While the media coverage percentages are similar between 126 00:08:22.000 --> 00:08:25.519 the two counties, Ada County has a much larger population 127 00:08:25.800 --> 00:08:29.720 than Lata County. According to Murphy, this means that the 128 00:08:29.759 --> 00:08:33.279 media coverage in Aida County is much more diluted, while 129 00:08:33.440 --> 00:08:38.240 Layta County is saturated with such coverage. Stated differently, media 130 00:08:38.279 --> 00:08:41.679 coverage in Layta County offered twice as many opportunities to 131 00:08:41.720 --> 00:08:45.360 be seen per person then in Ada County. The higher 132 00:08:45.480 --> 00:08:48.879 volume of coverage in Layta County, coupled with the smaller 133 00:08:48.879 --> 00:08:52.519 pool of eligible jurors, means people in Lata County had 134 00:08:52.559 --> 00:08:55.200 twice as many chances to be exposed to the case 135 00:08:55.639 --> 00:08:59.799 versus those residing in Ada County. When looking at the 136 00:09:00.039 --> 00:09:03.519 volume of media coverage over time, Ada County had a 137 00:09:03.559 --> 00:09:07.240 higher volume of media coverage from February twenty twenty three 138 00:09:07.519 --> 00:09:11.080 to June twenty twenty three. However, since that time, Ada 139 00:09:11.159 --> 00:09:14.799 County has consistently had the higher volume of media coverage, 140 00:09:14.840 --> 00:09:18.080 with the two counties being similar overall in their current 141 00:09:18.120 --> 00:09:21.840 coverage of the case. All of this, taken together, means 142 00:09:21.840 --> 00:09:25.039 that the probability of Leta County resident being exposed to 143 00:09:25.080 --> 00:09:28.039 media coverage of the case is much higher than the 144 00:09:28.039 --> 00:09:31.919 probability of an Ada County resident being exposed to media 145 00:09:32.000 --> 00:09:37.960 coverage of the case. Two. Doctor Amani l Alailee doctor 146 00:09:37.960 --> 00:09:43.000 Omani l Aleiley is a social psychologist and social cognition researcher. 147 00:09:43.559 --> 00:09:47.639 As part of her research, doctor Laliley evaluates how publicity 148 00:09:47.639 --> 00:09:51.519 about a case can shape potential jurors attitudes. Doctor l 149 00:09:51.559 --> 00:09:55.240 Aleiley has found that the more publicity a case generates, 150 00:09:55.279 --> 00:09:58.639 the more likely potential jurors are to dislike the defendant 151 00:09:58.840 --> 00:10:02.879 and view the defendant as guilty. Doctor lla Ley believes 152 00:10:02.879 --> 00:10:06.039 that the publicity in Leayta County residents that they've been 153 00:10:06.080 --> 00:10:09.519 exposed to make some biased against Coburger for several reasons, 154 00:10:10.120 --> 00:10:14.039 even if that bias is subconscious. First, Leayta County authority 155 00:10:14.039 --> 00:10:18.519 figures have publicly spoken about Coburger's guilt in absolute terms. 156 00:10:19.200 --> 00:10:22.559 The former Moscow Police Department Chief James Fry, who was 157 00:10:22.559 --> 00:10:26.519 the police chief during the investigation into the homicides publicly 158 00:10:26.639 --> 00:10:29.320 declared that he had no doubt that the right guy 159 00:10:29.360 --> 00:10:32.679 had been arrested for the crimes. After Coburger's arrest, the 160 00:10:32.759 --> 00:10:36.559 University of Idaho President Scott Green stated publicly that the 161 00:10:36.639 --> 00:10:41.960 university community once again felt safe. Generally speaking, individuals are 162 00:10:41.960 --> 00:10:45.120 more likely to trust and believe authority figures, so these 163 00:10:45.159 --> 00:10:49.360 statements by Layta County authority figures are particularly impactful to 164 00:10:49.440 --> 00:10:53.559 Layta County residents. Second, because Leayta County is a small, 165 00:10:53.600 --> 00:10:57.120 close knit community, community members feel a sense of loyalty 166 00:10:57.360 --> 00:11:01.519 to community views and fellow community members. For example, the 167 00:11:01.600 --> 00:11:05.240 Layta County jurors may feel an inner clash or conflict 168 00:11:05.639 --> 00:11:08.639 if they felt the state had not proven that Coburger 169 00:11:08.679 --> 00:11:11.519 is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, because they may feel 170 00:11:11.639 --> 00:11:15.799 voting not guilty would cause community outrage or once again 171 00:11:15.840 --> 00:11:19.960 cause fear within the community. Thus, the inner clash may 172 00:11:20.000 --> 00:11:22.840 cause jurors to vote guilty even when they believe there 173 00:11:22.879 --> 00:11:26.480 is reasonable doubt as to the guilt. This inner clash 174 00:11:26.759 --> 00:11:30.000 may be even greater when personal connections within Laytak County 175 00:11:30.039 --> 00:11:34.879 are considered. Similarly, given the small size of Leata County, 176 00:11:35.080 --> 00:11:39.279 Leaiyta County residents had a much more emotional experience surrounding 177 00:11:39.279 --> 00:11:43.039 the homicides and therefore or much more invested in the case. 178 00:11:43.440 --> 00:11:47.279 For example, when Coburger was arrested, Laytak County residents who 179 00:11:47.279 --> 00:11:50.840 had been fearful experienced a sense of relief, which equates 180 00:11:50.840 --> 00:11:55.159 the believing Coburger is guilty. Next, the extensive negative publicity 181 00:11:55.360 --> 00:11:59.840 surrounding Colburger leads potential jurors to think of Coburger negatively. 182 00:12:00.440 --> 00:12:03.799 Stated differently, before Coburger's arrest, if one was to hear 183 00:12:03.840 --> 00:12:07.799 the name Brian Kolberger, the reaction would have been neutral. Now, 184 00:12:07.919 --> 00:12:11.519 after Coburger's name and picture have been associated with terms 185 00:12:11.559 --> 00:12:15.639 like murderer, evil killer, and stalker. When individuals hear the name, 186 00:12:15.840 --> 00:12:19.279 there is negative association. This impact is greater in Leayta 187 00:12:19.360 --> 00:12:24.039 County because of the saturation of the extensive media coverage. Finally, 188 00:12:24.159 --> 00:12:28.600 given all of this, doctor l Aliale opined that it 189 00:12:28.679 --> 00:12:31.879 was arguably impossible for residents of Leata County to be 190 00:12:31.960 --> 00:12:35.000 asked to serve as impartial jurors because they are biased 191 00:12:35.000 --> 00:12:37.519 against Colburger, even if they do not want to be 192 00:12:37.600 --> 00:12:41.840 biased or think they are biased. This is particularly difficult 193 00:12:41.840 --> 00:12:45.639 for the defense to overcome because when humans process information 194 00:12:46.000 --> 00:12:49.399 while experiencing emotions like fear and anger, it's difficult to 195 00:12:49.480 --> 00:12:52.960 change the initial opinions formed, even in the face of 196 00:12:53.000 --> 00:12:57.759 contradictory evidence. Instead, we as humans pay greater attention to 197 00:12:57.799 --> 00:13:02.399 information that backs up a bist preconceived ideas and opinions 198 00:13:03.279 --> 00:13:07.720 taken together. Doctor L. Aaliley stated that, in her expert opinion, 199 00:13:07.879 --> 00:13:10.639 the best way to ensure Colberger is tried by affair 200 00:13:10.960 --> 00:13:13.720 and impartial jury is to find jurors who are both 201 00:13:13.759 --> 00:13:17.799 physically and psychologically removed from Leyta County. All Right, we're 202 00:13:17.799 --> 00:13:19.919 gonna wrap up this episode right here, and in the 203 00:13:19.960 --> 00:13:22.519 next episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up 204 00:13:22.559 --> 00:13:26.840 with three Doctor Brian Edelman. All of the information that 205 00:13:26.919 --> 00:13:30.639 goes with this episode can be found in the description box. 206 00:13:30.879 --> 00:13:34.240 What's up everyone, and welcome back to the program. In 207 00:13:34.320 --> 00:13:36.960 this episode, we're picking up where we left off with 208 00:13:37.080 --> 00:13:42.159 the order by Judge Judge for the venue to change three. 209 00:13:42.919 --> 00:13:48.200 Doctor Brian Edelman. Doctor Brian Edelman is a social psychologist 210 00:13:48.360 --> 00:13:51.039 who works as a trial consultant for a jury selection 211 00:13:51.440 --> 00:13:55.240 and pre trial research. In this case, the Defense hired 212 00:13:55.279 --> 00:13:58.399 doctor Edelman to conduct a survey of Leta County residents, 213 00:13:58.799 --> 00:14:03.480 Ada County residents, Canyon County residents, and Bannett County residents 214 00:14:03.519 --> 00:14:06.399 to determine if a change of venue motion was warranted. 215 00:14:07.320 --> 00:14:10.440 The key findings from the survey show that case recognition 216 00:14:10.559 --> 00:14:14.600 is high throughout Idaho. Ninety eight percent of survey respondents 217 00:14:14.600 --> 00:14:18.039 in Leayta County recognize the case, ninety three percent of 218 00:14:18.080 --> 00:14:21.919 survey respondents in Ada County recognize the case, ninety percent 219 00:14:21.919 --> 00:14:25.440 of survey respondents in Canyon County recognize the case, and 220 00:14:25.559 --> 00:14:29.159 eighty four percent of survey respondents in Bannett County recognize 221 00:14:29.200 --> 00:14:33.279 the case. In Lata County, of the ninety eight percent 222 00:14:33.320 --> 00:14:37.279 of respondents that recognize the case, sixty seven percent reported 223 00:14:37.320 --> 00:14:40.759 they believe Coburger is guilty. Twenty four point seven percent 224 00:14:40.840 --> 00:14:45.519 reported that they believe that Coburger is definitely guilty. Similarly, 225 00:14:45.840 --> 00:14:49.080 in Ada County, sixty eight percent of respondents who recognize 226 00:14:49.120 --> 00:14:52.840 the case believe Coburger is guilty. Twenty two percent reported 227 00:14:52.840 --> 00:14:57.240 believing Coburger is definitely guilty. Sixty nine percent of respondents 228 00:14:57.240 --> 00:15:00.720 in Canyon County believe Coburger is guilty. Twenty three percent 229 00:15:00.799 --> 00:15:04.879 reported Colburger is definitely guilty, and seventy six percent of 230 00:15:04.919 --> 00:15:08.679 respondents in Bane County believe Colburger is guilty. Nineteen percent 231 00:15:08.759 --> 00:15:13.639 reported Coburger is definitely guilty. In Layta County, twenty nine 232 00:15:13.679 --> 00:15:17.240 percent of survey respondents were reported following the case very 233 00:15:17.240 --> 00:15:20.720 closely and thirty eight point five percent reported following the 234 00:15:20.759 --> 00:15:25.120 case somewhat closely. In Ada County, forty nine percent reported 235 00:15:25.159 --> 00:15:28.879 they believe death was the appropriate sentence. Fifty seven percent 236 00:15:28.919 --> 00:15:32.399 of respondents in Canyon County reported that they believe death 237 00:15:32.559 --> 00:15:35.679 was the appropriate sentence, and fifty three percent in Banitt 238 00:15:35.759 --> 00:15:39.200 County reported that they believe death was the appropriate sentence. 239 00:15:39.919 --> 00:15:44.279 In Layta County, twenty nine percent of survey respondents reported 240 00:15:44.320 --> 00:15:47.639 following the case very closely and thirty eight point five 241 00:15:47.679 --> 00:15:51.960 percent reported following the case somewhat closely. In Ada County, 242 00:15:52.200 --> 00:15:55.279 fifty eight percent of respondents reported following the case very 243 00:15:55.279 --> 00:15:59.200 closely or somewhat closely, while that number fell to fifty 244 00:15:59.240 --> 00:16:02.759 one percent in Canyon County and forty six percent in 245 00:16:02.879 --> 00:16:06.639 Bannit County. Thirty nine percent of survey respondents in Leayta 246 00:16:06.759 --> 00:16:11.000 County indicated they experienced higher levels of stress, anxiety, or 247 00:16:11.159 --> 00:16:14.519 fear during the search for the person responsible for the killings. 248 00:16:15.120 --> 00:16:19.240 This contrasts with seventeen percent of Ada County respondents who 249 00:16:19.320 --> 00:16:22.720 answered yes to the question, eleven percent of Canyon County 250 00:16:22.720 --> 00:16:26.480 respondents who answered yes, and eleven percent of Bannitt County 251 00:16:26.519 --> 00:16:31.639 respondents who answered yes. Additionally, a higher number of Leata 252 00:16:31.759 --> 00:16:35.440 County residents reported talking about the case with others living 253 00:16:35.480 --> 00:16:38.600 in Moscow when the homicides occurred, having ties to the 254 00:16:38.679 --> 00:16:42.320 University of Idaho, and having ties to law enforcement who 255 00:16:42.399 --> 00:16:47.279 investigated the crimes. Finally, Doctor Edelman considered the population sizes 256 00:16:47.519 --> 00:16:51.000 of the county surveyed, with Ada County having sixty six, 257 00:16:51.519 --> 00:16:54.879 nine hundred and eleven residents and Leata County having thirty 258 00:16:54.919 --> 00:16:58.399 two thousand, five hundred and fifteen residents. Based on all 259 00:16:58.399 --> 00:17:01.799 the information obtained from the survey, Doctor Edelman upon the 260 00:17:01.879 --> 00:17:05.960 case recognition and presumption of guilt is and will continue 261 00:17:06.000 --> 00:17:09.559 to be high throughout Idaho given the extensive media coverage 262 00:17:09.640 --> 00:17:13.559 the case is generated. In his opinion, population size matters. 263 00:17:13.960 --> 00:17:17.519 For example, if roughly fifty percent of Leayta County residents 264 00:17:17.680 --> 00:17:21.839 presume Coburger is guilty. That leaves approximately fifteen thousand Layta 265 00:17:21.960 --> 00:17:25.720 County residents who do not hold this presumption. Of those, 266 00:17:26.039 --> 00:17:29.920 not all are eligible to serve as a jur In 267 00:17:30.000 --> 00:17:33.400 contrast to fifty percent of Ada County residents presume Coburger 268 00:17:33.480 --> 00:17:36.880 is guilty. That leaves over two hundred thousand residents who 269 00:17:36.880 --> 00:17:40.160 do not hold such a presumption. Thus, Ada County has 270 00:17:40.200 --> 00:17:43.880 a much larger pool of non biased potential jurors. Even 271 00:17:43.960 --> 00:17:47.480 more important to doctor Edelman, though, was the issue of 272 00:17:47.519 --> 00:17:51.400 personal connections within Leayta County and the personal impact this 273 00:17:51.519 --> 00:17:56.759 case has had on Leyta County residence. The feelings of fear, stress, 274 00:17:56.880 --> 00:18:01.720 and anxiety surrounding the homicides where significantly greater in Leaytah 275 00:18:01.720 --> 00:18:05.039 County than in other counties. This was also true for 276 00:18:05.079 --> 00:18:08.920 the connections to the University of Idaho and local law enforcement. 277 00:18:09.559 --> 00:18:13.759 Doctor Edelman testified that these connections and experiences are the 278 00:18:13.799 --> 00:18:16.480 real issue when it comes to seating an impartial jury 279 00:18:16.759 --> 00:18:20.920 in Leata County. Based on the results of his surveys, 280 00:18:20.960 --> 00:18:24.440 doctor Edelman opining that in his expert opinion, there is 281 00:18:24.480 --> 00:18:28.519 a reasonable likelihood the presumption of guilt prevails in Laytah County, 282 00:18:28.680 --> 00:18:32.359 and that a change of venue is appropriate. Number four 283 00:18:32.720 --> 00:18:36.839 Doctor Veronica the Hear. Doctor Veronica to Hear was called 284 00:18:36.839 --> 00:18:40.000 by the defense to offer her expert opinion as to 285 00:18:40.119 --> 00:18:43.319 the validity of the survey work done by doctor Edelman. 286 00:18:43.400 --> 00:18:47.240 In this case. Doctor d'her testified that the surveys were 287 00:18:47.240 --> 00:18:52.079 conducted in accordance with applicable standards and the results were sound. 288 00:18:52.319 --> 00:18:57.279 Five media articles and video clips. The defense also submitted 289 00:18:57.359 --> 00:19:00.920 numerous media articles in video clips demonstrating the sheer of 290 00:19:01.000 --> 00:19:04.920 volume of coverage this case is generated. The court agrees 291 00:19:05.119 --> 00:19:07.680 and the State does not dispute that the coverage of 292 00:19:07.720 --> 00:19:11.319 this case by both mainstream media and social media outlets 293 00:19:11.519 --> 00:19:15.599 has been extensive in Letah County, throughout Idaho, and nationally. 294 00:19:16.599 --> 00:19:19.160 While some of the mainstream reporting has been appropriate and 295 00:19:19.200 --> 00:19:22.119 based on information from the court record, there has been 296 00:19:22.200 --> 00:19:26.200 extensive coverage that is prejudicial to Coburger and likely it 297 00:19:26.279 --> 00:19:31.960 admissible at trial. Part four the standard both the Idaho 298 00:19:32.079 --> 00:19:36.079 Constitution and the United States Constitution protect a defendant's right 299 00:19:36.119 --> 00:19:39.279 to a fair trial by an impartial jury. To help 300 00:19:39.319 --> 00:19:43.400 achieve a constitutionally sound trial, Idaho Criminal Rule twenty one 301 00:19:43.680 --> 00:19:47.119 allows transfer of a case for trial. In certain instances, 302 00:19:48.079 --> 00:19:51.759 Idaho Criminal Rule twenty one a states that on a 303 00:19:51.839 --> 00:19:55.000 motion of either party, the court must transfer the proceeding 304 00:19:55.000 --> 00:19:57.960 to another county if the court is satisfied that affair 305 00:19:58.359 --> 00:20:01.599 and impartial trial cannot be had in the county where 306 00:20:01.599 --> 00:20:06.279 the case is pending. Similarly, Idaho Codes Section nineteen eighteen 307 00:20:06.319 --> 00:20:10.519 oh one states that a criminal action prosecuted by indictment 308 00:20:10.799 --> 00:20:13.440 may be removed from the court in which it's pending 309 00:20:13.680 --> 00:20:16.359 on the application of the defendant, on the ground that 310 00:20:16.400 --> 00:20:19.240 a fair and impartial trial cannot be had in the 311 00:20:19.279 --> 00:20:23.519 county where the indictment is pending. Idaho Criminal Rule number 312 00:20:23.559 --> 00:20:28.200 twenty one also allows transfer for convenience. On motion of 313 00:20:28.240 --> 00:20:31.319 the defendant, the court may transfer proceedings to another county 314 00:20:31.440 --> 00:20:34.240 for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in the 315 00:20:34.279 --> 00:20:38.000 interest of justice. A motion for change of venue pursuant 316 00:20:38.200 --> 00:20:41.160 to Idaho Criminal Rule twenty one is left to the 317 00:20:41.279 --> 00:20:46.839 discretion of the trial court. Part five Analysis one prejudice. 318 00:20:46.880 --> 00:20:49.319 In deciding a motion for change of venue, the court 319 00:20:49.359 --> 00:20:53.799 determines whether the totality of the circumstances duror exposure to 320 00:20:53.880 --> 00:20:56.759 pre trial publicity will result in a trial that is 321 00:20:56.799 --> 00:21:01.559 not fundamentally fair. The critical in is whether the nature 322 00:21:01.599 --> 00:21:05.039 of their exposure to pre trial publicity caused the prospective 323 00:21:05.119 --> 00:21:08.200 jur to form an opinion about the defendant's guilt and 324 00:21:08.319 --> 00:21:10.880 as a result, they are unable to serve as an 325 00:21:10.960 --> 00:21:15.640 unbiased juror. In determining whether a criminal defendant actually received 326 00:21:15.640 --> 00:21:19.519 a fair trial, the Idaho Supreme Court considers the following factors. 327 00:21:19.880 --> 00:21:23.880 One the existence of affid David's indicating prejudice or an 328 00:21:23.920 --> 00:21:27.240 absence of prejudice in the community where the trial took place. 329 00:21:27.720 --> 00:21:31.160 Two the testimony of the jurors at jury selection regarding 330 00:21:31.200 --> 00:21:34.039 whether they had formed an opinion based upon adverse pre 331 00:21:34.160 --> 00:21:38.319 trial publicity. And three whether the defendant challenged for cause 332 00:21:38.720 --> 00:21:42.279 any of the jurors finally selected. Four the nature and 333 00:21:42.359 --> 00:21:45.720 content of the pre trial publicity, and five the amount 334 00:21:45.720 --> 00:21:48.920 of time elapsed between pre trial publicity and the trial. 335 00:21:50.000 --> 00:21:53.160 Some of these factors can only be evaluated during or 336 00:21:53.200 --> 00:21:56.400 after jury selection, while others can be evaluated by the 337 00:21:56.440 --> 00:21:59.960 trial court in deciding an earlier emotion to change venue 338 00:22:01.119 --> 00:22:06.079 a actual prejudice. In evaluating actual juror prejudice, the relevant 339 00:22:06.160 --> 00:22:09.079 question is not whether the community remembered the case, but 340 00:22:09.200 --> 00:22:13.000 whether the jurors at trial had such fixed opinions that 341 00:22:13.079 --> 00:22:15.920 they would not judge impartially the guilt of the defendant. 342 00:22:16.640 --> 00:22:20.400 Stated differently, courts must evaluate whether, in the totality of 343 00:22:20.440 --> 00:22:25.079 the existing circumstances, juror exposure to pre trial publicity resulted 344 00:22:25.119 --> 00:22:29.200 in a trial that was not fundamentally fairer. The defendant 345 00:22:29.240 --> 00:22:33.960 bears the burden of proving prejudice or showing reasonable likelihood 346 00:22:34.000 --> 00:22:37.759 that there was prejudice. In reviewing case law, a finding 347 00:22:37.759 --> 00:22:41.240 of actual juror prejudice rests on examination of the jury 348 00:22:41.240 --> 00:22:46.200 selection process. This includes evaluating how jurors answered screening questionnaires, 349 00:22:46.599 --> 00:22:50.400 the testimony during Vordeer as the whole, and the jurors 350 00:22:50.440 --> 00:22:54.000 eventually seated, and any juror seated despite a four cause 351 00:22:54.119 --> 00:22:58.640 challenge by the defense. These factors are considered along with 352 00:22:58.720 --> 00:23:02.039 evaluating pre trial pay publicity itself and the timing of 353 00:23:02.079 --> 00:23:05.759 that publicity. Here, the defense argues that the survey work 354 00:23:05.799 --> 00:23:11.039 of doctor Edelman establishes actual prejudice within Leayta County. However, 355 00:23:11.160 --> 00:23:14.640 actual prejudice cannot be evaluated at this juncture based on 356 00:23:14.720 --> 00:23:18.039 a survey of some four hundred Blayta County residents who 357 00:23:18.039 --> 00:23:21.240 are anonymous, did not answer questions in court and were 358 00:23:21.279 --> 00:23:25.160 not subject to questioning by the state without attempting to 359 00:23:25.160 --> 00:23:27.839 see a jury. There is no real evidence, such as 360 00:23:27.960 --> 00:23:32.200 juris screening questionnaires and testimony during Vordeer for this court 361 00:23:32.240 --> 00:23:38.279 to evaluate actual prejudice. B presume prejudice. Adverse pre trial 362 00:23:38.319 --> 00:23:41.480 publicity can create such a presumption of prejudice that the 363 00:23:41.559 --> 00:23:45.000 jurors claim that they can be impartial should not be believed. 364 00:23:45.119 --> 00:23:49.200 Unlike with actual prejudice, finding a presumed prejudice means that 365 00:23:49.279 --> 00:23:52.519 the court need not consider a juris screening questionnaires or 366 00:23:52.599 --> 00:23:56.559 testimony during Vordeer before declaring a jury verdict void or 367 00:23:56.599 --> 00:23:59.599 in this case, declaring a change of venue appropriate based 368 00:23:59.599 --> 00:24:03.200 on PUREJJ. It is the defendant's burden to establish a 369 00:24:03.240 --> 00:24:07.839 reasonable likelihood prejudicial news coverage prevented or will prevent a 370 00:24:07.839 --> 00:24:10.559 fair trial in violation of the sixth Amendment to the 371 00:24:10.640 --> 00:24:15.839 United States Constitution. In cases where juror prejudice has been presumed, 372 00:24:16.079 --> 00:24:19.640 the following factors have been examined. One, the size and 373 00:24:19.799 --> 00:24:23.720 characteristics of the community in which the crime occurred, whether 374 00:24:23.799 --> 00:24:27.920 news stories contained a confession or other blatantly prejudicial information 375 00:24:28.240 --> 00:24:31.480 of the type readers or viewers could not reasonably be 376 00:24:31.559 --> 00:24:34.759 expected to shut from sight three, the lapse of time 377 00:24:34.799 --> 00:24:37.799 between the prejudicial news coverage and the trial and for 378 00:24:38.160 --> 00:24:41.759 what the jury actually found. As far as guilt is concerned, 379 00:24:42.240 --> 00:24:45.200 the amount of time elapse between the pre trial publicity 380 00:24:45.200 --> 00:24:48.079 and the trial. When reviewing the nature and content of 381 00:24:48.119 --> 00:24:50.960 pre trial publicity, the trial court should be concerned with 382 00:24:51.039 --> 00:24:54.279 the accuracy of the pre trial publicity, the extent to 383 00:24:54.319 --> 00:24:58.359 which the articles are inflammatory, inaccurate, or beyond the scope 384 00:24:58.400 --> 00:25:01.480 of admissible evidence, and the number of articles, and whether 385 00:25:01.559 --> 00:25:05.960 the jurors were so incessantly exposed to such articles that 386 00:25:06.000 --> 00:25:09.599 they had subtly become conditioned to accept a particular version 387 00:25:09.640 --> 00:25:12.599 of the facts at trial had in one fifty two 388 00:25:12.759 --> 00:25:16.160 Idaho at three seventy seven two seventy one, p Dot 389 00:25:16.200 --> 00:25:19.799 three d at twelve thirty three. All right, we're going 390 00:25:19.839 --> 00:25:22.000 to wrap up right here, and in the next episode, 391 00:25:22.240 --> 00:25:25.039 we're going to finish this bad boy off. All of 392 00:25:25.079 --> 00:25:28.279 the information that goes with this episode can be found 393 00:25:28.400 --> 00:25:31.880 in the description box. What's up everyone, and welcome back 394 00:25:31.920 --> 00:25:34.960 to the program. In this episode, we're going to finish 395 00:25:34.960 --> 00:25:39.519 off taking a look at Judge John Judge's order to 396 00:25:39.640 --> 00:25:44.200 change the venue in the Brian Koberger trial. First as 397 00:25:44.200 --> 00:25:47.680 to the size and characteristics. First, as to the size 398 00:25:47.759 --> 00:25:51.359 and the characteristics of the community. Leta County is a 399 00:25:51.400 --> 00:25:56.319 relatively small community with a population of approximately forty one thousand, 400 00:25:56.480 --> 00:25:59.759 twenty four, nine hundred and sixty three who are eligible 401 00:25:59.799 --> 00:26:03.079