Speaker 1: Hi, guys, Welcome to another episode of Legally Brunette. I'll
Speaker 1: be your host, Emily Simpson with my sidekick Shane. I
Speaker 1: love how Shane always just has a first name. It's
Speaker 1: never Shane Simpson. It's like Shaer Madonna and Shane. Anyway,
Speaker 1: we're just gonna do a little update. If you listened
Speaker 1: to the last episode, we did a little tidbit on
Speaker 1: this Kimberly Sullivan case, which is the crazy step mom
Speaker 1: who kept her step son locked away for twenty years. Anyway,
Speaker 1: there's just a little bit of an update on that.
Speaker 1: She the biological mom, which we were questioning before. Remember
Speaker 1: when we were talking about this case, like where is
Speaker 1: the Yeah, because it's the step mom that kept him
Speaker 1: locked away. Yes, So there was a USA article that
Speaker 1: came out that so the biological mom came forward and
Speaker 1: the biological mom is a fifty two year old woman
Speaker 1: named Tracy and she was who identified herself as the
Speaker 1: biological mother of Kimberly Sullivan's stepson. And she said, thirty
Speaker 1: two years ago, due to personal reasons and for the
Speaker 1: full benefit of my son, she made the gut wrenching
Speaker 1: decision to give full custody to the ex husband. First
Speaker 1: of all, I just have to say, as a mother,
Speaker 1: I can never wrap my brain around someone giving away
Speaker 1: full custody of their children, regardless of the circumstances. I
Speaker 1: just I cannot imagine any scenario where I give up.
Speaker 2: My children, unless it was a full blown adoption scenario,
Speaker 2: like a parent is giving away the child for a
Speaker 2: better life.
Speaker 1: To go and oh, okay, no, I understand that. I
Speaker 1: guess I don't understand a situation where you're the biological mother,
Speaker 1: you have the child, but then you give up full
Speaker 1: custody to the other parent and you just don't want
Speaker 1: any kind of visitation or anything anyway. She said it
Speaker 1: was a painful, emotional decision that's hard for any mother
Speaker 1: to make, but she thought it would have She thought
Speaker 1: her son would have a better life, which is the
Speaker 1: irony here in retrospect, this does not come to pass.
Speaker 1: For the last thirty years, my family and I have
Speaker 1: searched for him to reconnect, only to be turned away
Speaker 1: and shut out. So she claims that they had been
Speaker 1: looking for him and that she had reached out, and
Speaker 1: that basically the father and the stepmom didn't want her
Speaker 1: to have anything to do with the child.
Speaker 3: Well, yeah, because she's gonna find out he was locked
Speaker 3: in a room.
Speaker 1: Probably. She claims that the last few days had been
Speaker 1: so shocking, disturbing, and disgusting to even seem true. I
Speaker 1: hope him, pray we can all begin to heal and
Speaker 1: help my son to lead a full, happy, loving life.
Speaker 1: I know deep in my heart I have always been
Speaker 1: there for him and always will. Please grant us time,
Speaker 1: peace and respect as we cope with this tragic situation.
Speaker 1: So she said that she had tried to be in
Speaker 1: her son's life. She also has a daughter who would
Speaker 1: be the man who was I guess they never released
Speaker 1: his name. I just keep calling him the man, but
Speaker 1: he's the step son and the one that was the victim,
Speaker 1: the victim that was locked away. He has a half sister,
Speaker 1: and apparently the half sister had been using social media
Speaker 1: and other online tools to try and find her brother
Speaker 1: for years, but had not had any success. Well, we
Speaker 1: know he's not on social media because he's been tortured
Speaker 1: for the past twenty years.
Speaker 3: So you know it now.
Speaker 2: It's kind of sad because these people wanted to look
Speaker 2: for him, and they were probably hopeful they'd have a
Speaker 2: relationship with him. And then he was in a good
Speaker 2: place and that maybe you know, he had good upbringing
Speaker 2: and now they could reconnect, now that maybe the mom
Speaker 2: is in a better situation, and only to find out
Speaker 2: that he.
Speaker 1: Was you know, yeah, well, I mean, how devastated would
Speaker 1: you be as a mother if her intent in the
Speaker 1: beginning was really she did give up custody because she
Speaker 1: thought he would have a better life with the father
Speaker 1: who maybe was more She might.
Speaker 2: Have thought it would be less co parenting issues, and
Speaker 2: maybe he could have some stability because maybe they were
Speaker 2: at odds, and so she thought, you know what, instead
Speaker 2: of me fighting this father all the time, maybe I'll
Speaker 2: give him a stable household and just let him go.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But then to think thirty years old, I yeah,
Speaker 1: find out that you gave away full custody of your
Speaker 1: child because you thought they would have a better life,
Speaker 1: and then you come to learn that they were locked away, starved, emaciated.
Speaker 3: Torture and almost couldn't have been a worse life.
Speaker 1: Had to set their house on fire in order to
Speaker 1: get someone's attention and be saved. His half sister says,
Speaker 1: I just want him to know that he has a
Speaker 1: big sister, And I've always known he had, that he's existed.
Speaker 1: I've always loved him and I've always been trying to
Speaker 1: find him. I've been looking for him for over a decade.
Speaker 1: I wanted to wait until he was eighteen. I'm almost
Speaker 1: thirty five now. There was nothing, no social media, no
Speaker 1: court records. So it seems to me that she did
Speaker 1: kind of try to do.
Speaker 2: A deep diet doesn't exist. And I bet you the
Speaker 2: parents deliberately were not on the internet.
Speaker 1: Also, probably they were probably hiding this, hiding everything about this,
Speaker 1: this family life.
Speaker 3: Now they're all over the internet.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So, Kimberly Sullivan, who is the stepmom this step son.
Speaker 1: I don't know where she's at as far as a case,
Speaker 1: I mean as she was arrested, and I don't think
Speaker 1: we've had any update, right, I.
Speaker 2: Don't know, but hope she doesn't get doesn't see the
Speaker 2: light a day, right.
Speaker 1: So, the step son and his biological mother have not
Speaker 1: connected since this discovery, which was a month ago, but
Speaker 1: the mother told NBC Connecticut that she hopes that they
Speaker 1: reunite soon. I hope so too. I hope I hope
Speaker 1: that he has some yes, And it sounds like the
Speaker 1: sister is very interested in being a part of his life.
Speaker 1: So hopefully there is some happy ending for this man.
Speaker 2: Because maybe he can get uh, maybe he can collect
Speaker 2: the insurance proceeds from the f fire.
Speaker 1: He deserves at least that much. Yes, all right, here's
Speaker 1: another interesting story. I just want to do a little
Speaker 1: brief background on some of these smaller cases, and then
Speaker 1: we're actually going to go into the Brian Coburger case,
Speaker 1: which is the Idaho murders case. I just I read
Speaker 1: this and I actually found this. I don't know why
Speaker 1: I found it interesting. Maybe because it's a husband and
Speaker 1: wife and we're a husband.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 2: I'm curious to know what it says, wife kills husband.
Speaker 2: I find this interesting.
Speaker 1: It's actually husband tries to kill a wife. But oh,
Speaker 1: so this is Ario and his name's Gerhard Koenig. He
Speaker 1: is a man accused of trying to kill his wife
Speaker 1: in Hawaii. This just recently happened. So on Monday, March
Speaker 1: twenty fourth, forty six year old Gerhard tried to push
Speaker 1: his wife Ariel off of a cliff in Oahu on
Speaker 1: a trip that he planned for her birthday.
Speaker 3: So they're not from Hawaii.
Speaker 1: No, I think they live in Maui.
Speaker 2: Actually Okay, so they're locals, yes, and so thanks for
Speaker 2: her birthday, he plans a birthday trips surprise, yes.
Speaker 3: Push.
Speaker 1: The couple, who have been married for six years and
Speaker 1: shared two young children together, live in Maui. Ariel told
Speaker 1: the story of her attempted murder in her own words
Speaker 1: and an application for a restraining order against her husband
Speaker 1: on Thursday.
Speaker 2: So he how did she succeed? How did she overcome
Speaker 2: his pushing her off a cliff?
Speaker 1: Okay, so let's get into the details of this. Gerhard,
Speaker 1: who is the husband, suggested that they take a hike
Speaker 1: on a trail near one of the local lookouts. In
Speaker 1: her court filing, she noted the topography of the trail,
Speaker 1: saying it was very narrow ridge sections with steep drop
Speaker 1: offs on both sides. He then won it as selfie
Speaker 1: at the edge of the cliff, but she was uncomfortable
Speaker 1: and moved away. He's like, no, one foot off the
Speaker 1: cliffs closer a little more, she said. That was when
Speaker 1: her husband tried to push her. He was yelling something
Speaker 1: to the effect of get back over here. I'm so
Speaker 1: effing sick of you, and he continued to push me.
Speaker 1: She wrote. She thought he was joking at first, I
Speaker 1: don't know why I would.
Speaker 2: Oh, so he wants to give her some last words
Speaker 2: before he pushes her off.
Speaker 3: Well, he's mad.
Speaker 1: Because she's moving away. She's not close enough to the edge,
Speaker 1: so he's yelling at her to get back over there.
Speaker 1: And then she claims that she quickly realized that he
Speaker 1: was not joking, that he was seriously trying to make
Speaker 1: me fall off of the cliff. She then writes, and
Speaker 1: this is an application for a restraining order, that she
Speaker 1: threw herself onto the ground away from the edge to
Speaker 1: save herself, at which point her husband climbed on top
Speaker 1: of her. At one point, she said, this is a doctor.
Speaker 1: By the way, he's an antithesiologist. He grabbed his bag
Speaker 1: and pulled out a syringe and vial and tried to
Speaker 1: inject her.
Speaker 3: He brought his medical bag.
Speaker 1: Yes, wouldn't that have been a sign? Don't you think
Speaker 1: He's like, let's go on a hike, but I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna bring my my anesthesiologists bag with me.
Speaker 3: Wow.
Speaker 2: So, so he's attempting to inject her with something?
Speaker 3: Yes, so too. Yes, So she's awesome.
Speaker 1: I know she's a badass.
Speaker 3: I should have pushed him off the cliff.
Speaker 1: I do not know what was in the syringe, but
Speaker 1: Gerhardt is an antithesiologist and has access to several potentially
Speaker 1: lethal medications as part of his employment, she wrote in
Speaker 1: this court filing. Ultimately, the doctor who's the husband, grabbed
Speaker 1: a rock and began to pound her in the head.
Speaker 1: Miss Koenig told police that he also grabbed her hair
Speaker 1: and smashed her face into the ground. Luckily for her,
Speaker 1: there were two women farther down the trail that interview
Speaker 1: that intervened, and they told police that they heard a
Speaker 1: woman screaming for help. One of the women told police
Speaker 1: that she ran ahead and saw a man hitting a
Speaker 1: woman in the head with a rock. He is trying
Speaker 1: to kill me.
Speaker 3: The woman holding a medical bag.
Speaker 1: Yes, a man with a medical bag and a syringe,
Speaker 1: close to the edge of a cliff on a trail
Speaker 1: was beating her over the head with a rock. They
Speaker 1: shouted that they were calling nine to one one and
Speaker 1: the man fled. The women then helped Miss Koenig down
Speaker 1: the trail. I like that he flees like no one's
Speaker 1: going to know what's him.
Speaker 2: Hopefully they won't be identify my wife won't be able
Speaker 2: to identify me.
Speaker 1: Police pull out an all points bulletin for doctor Koenig
Speaker 1: and shut down the area around the look at and
Speaker 1: trails during a multi hour manhunt. He was found and
Speaker 1: taken into custody about six pm that evening. In the interim,
Speaker 1: Miss Koenig said she learned that doctor Koenig had called
Speaker 1: one of his adult children. So he has adult children
Speaker 1: with a different wife. I guess he called.
Speaker 3: They have a children together, they two, they have two.
Speaker 1: Young children together, and they were married for six years.
Speaker 1: But apparently he called one of his adult children via FaceTime.
Speaker 1: Allegedly he was covered in blood and said I just
Speaker 1: tried to kill Ari, but she got away.
Speaker 3: Yeah, can you can you be my alibi?
Speaker 1: It's I hate that I'm laughing at this, but.
Speaker 3: This is well, if she didn't survive, we certainly no.
Speaker 1: But she she survived.
Speaker 3: So I mean not she didn't sur write without any trauma, right.
Speaker 1: Ms Koonig wrote that she is afraid for herself. Well,
Speaker 1: that seems obvious at this point, her children and the
Speaker 1: rest of her family if her husband is released on bail.
Speaker 1: His bail has been set at five million, and he
Speaker 1: is expected back in court on March thirty first for
Speaker 1: preliminary hearing. I find this case so interesting that I
Speaker 1: feel like we might have to do a follow up
Speaker 1: after his March thirty first preliminary hearing. I just clearly
Speaker 1: poorly executed, clearly not well thought out, or he underestimated
Speaker 1: how strong Yea his wife is. I think he thought
Speaker 1: he was just going to be able to push her
Speaker 1: off the edge really easily.
Speaker 3: So my goodness, all right.
Speaker 1: That to get into the bulk of what do.
Speaker 3: We know the motive? I you know, I have a.
Speaker 1: I assumed that there was a mistress because when I
Speaker 1: was reading and it said he facetimed, I thought it
Speaker 1: was going to say he facetimed his mistress. But it
Speaker 1: wasn't his mistress.
Speaker 2: It was but his daughter wasn't in on it or
Speaker 2: anything or there's no no, not known anything about.
Speaker 1: That, not that we know of right now, although it
Speaker 1: makes me speculate because he called the adult child and
Speaker 1: said like she got away basically, so I don't know
Speaker 1: if other people were involved in this plot. We shall
Speaker 1: stay tuned and let you know of any updates on
Speaker 1: this case. But Shane is not taking me to Maui
Speaker 1: or Uah anytime soon. I refuse to go all right,
Speaker 1: all right, let's get out. Have to be more creative, Yeah,
Speaker 1: to think of something better than that. Okay, let's get
Speaker 1: into the bulk of this episode. We really wanted to
Speaker 1: do the Brian Coburger case, which is the Idaho student murders.
Speaker 1: I've had tons and tons of you guys out there
Speaker 1: that have been listening to legally Brunette thank you by
Speaker 1: the way, dming me and asking us to go through it.
Speaker 1: So he he does go on trials soon. I believe
Speaker 1: it's August eleventh, So this will be just an episode
Speaker 1: of the background, the facts, the evidence, where we're at currently,
Speaker 1: and then we hope to most likely follow the trial
Speaker 1: once he goes to trial. Let's do a little bit
Speaker 1: of the background of this case. Let's just give us
Speaker 1: some background information so we're all on the same page.
Speaker 1: So in the early hours of November thirteenth and twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two, University of Idaho students. It was Kaylee Gonkalvius
Speaker 1: who was twenty one, Madison Mogan twenty one, Xana Kernodle
Speaker 1: twenty and Ethan Chapin twenty.
Speaker 3: How many lived in the house.
Speaker 1: So there were five girls that lived within the house.
Speaker 1: Ethan was staying the night with his girlfriend Xana, he
Speaker 1: did not live in the home, and then there were
Speaker 1: the two survivors. So on this night, on November thirteenth,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two, there were four college students were murdered
Speaker 1: and they're off campus residents. Thirty year old Brian Koberger
Speaker 1: has been accused of the murders and is being charged
Speaker 1: with four counts of first degree murder and one count
Speaker 1: of burglary. At his arraignment, he did not I don't
Speaker 1: know if you knew this, But when they asked him
Speaker 1: how he pleaded, he just he stayed silent. So the
Speaker 1: judge entered a not guilty plea on his behalf.
Speaker 2: He should have entered it guilty plea. If you don't
Speaker 2: say anything, then you're gonna be guilty. Yeah, but it's
Speaker 2: and it would be easy. Then you just sent in something.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but I feel I feel like that's unconstitutional. I
Speaker 1: don't know.
Speaker 3: I wasn't talking about legality. Oh, I'm sorry, guys, clearly
Speaker 3: a nut murder.
Speaker 1: Well, he is innocent until proven guilty, so we have
Speaker 1: to we have to stick with that. If convicted, he
Speaker 1: could face the death penalty and Idaho. Also, I know,
Speaker 1: I don't know if he read.
Speaker 3: This method of death penalty in Idaho.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 3: I didn't look that up, but I'm going to look
Speaker 3: it up. Okay, look up it's important facts.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I really need to prepare myself for all the questions.
Speaker 1: I don't know what. I don't know what would it be?
Speaker 3: Chair?
Speaker 1: Electric chair or lethal injection? Aren't those the only two methods?
Speaker 3: Firing squad?
Speaker 1: They do use the firing squad.
Speaker 2: You t use the firing squad. There was someone that
Speaker 2: was executed this month. I think I don't remember what
Speaker 2: state that shows the firing squad.
Speaker 3: Oh wow, that's what I would choose.
Speaker 1: You would choose the firing squad.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I would choose not to commit crimes that
Speaker 2: are first choice. I've thought about this. You stand there
Speaker 2: with a blindfold. Yeah, right, you don't really know what's
Speaker 2: going on, and it's.
Speaker 1: Just you don't know what's going on.
Speaker 3: I guess you.
Speaker 2: Don't see what's going on, right, Like like the lethal
Speaker 2: injection is there's too many steps.
Speaker 1: I don't understand why there's.
Speaker 2: Strapping you down. There's multiple injections. They you know, all
Speaker 2: this stuff and it's like a slow process to your death. Okay,
Speaker 2: firing squad, I go stand there, there's ten armed men
Speaker 2: that stand in front of you, or however many there is,
Speaker 2: only one has a bullet. I don't know how that
Speaker 2: really helps their conscious but yeah, that way, you don't
Speaker 2: know who did it. That's the same with the electric share.
Speaker 2: There was multiple, which is and you flipped.
Speaker 3: Him and you didn't know which one did it.
Speaker 1: Why is that supposed to protect the person firing?
Speaker 2: Yeah, so maybe they have some conscience of well, I
Speaker 2: don't know if it was me they killed them, which
Speaker 2: is like, but I was willing to point a gun
Speaker 2: at them and pull the trigger. Anyway, it's just one
Speaker 2: quick shot in the heart and.
Speaker 3: That's it and it's over.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so that's what you would shoot.
Speaker 2: Yeah, firing squad is now the primary method of execution,
Speaker 2: and lethal injection is an alternative.
Speaker 1: See that was right, that's crazy to me, all right.
Speaker 1: There were two survivors from that night. The roommates were
Speaker 1: Dylan Mortenson and Bethany Funk. They were home at the
Speaker 1: time of the murders. There's a lot of interesting things
Speaker 1: are going with that. We're going to get more in
Speaker 1: detail into that so the events of that night. After
Speaker 1: a busy Saturday night out, all the roommates were back
Speaker 1: at the house by approximately two am the morning of
Speaker 1: November thirteenth. Kernodle and Shapen, they're the ones that are dating,
Speaker 1: had been at a party at a frat house, and
Speaker 1: Matty Mogan and gun Calves were at a local bar.
Speaker 1: Then they stopped at a food truck. It was called
Speaker 1: the grub Truck. I actually was very interested in the
Speaker 1: food truck.
Speaker 3: I know, I knew the food truck would catch you.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I did for a late night snack. And there's
Speaker 1: actually video surveillance on the food truck because they I
Speaker 1: guess what they do. They put it onto TikTok or
Speaker 1: something like all the it's like a like a marketing
Speaker 1: a marketing thing for them. So there was actually very clear.
Speaker 2: Footage of provide security. They might document in case someone steals.
Speaker 1: Someone seals tacos. Come again, right, If I was ever
Speaker 1: going to commit a crime, it would be something It would.
Speaker 3: Be sealing eating someone's it would be eating.
Speaker 1: Somebody else's tacos. Yeah. Xana Kernodle briefly left her room
Speaker 1: to grab a door dash order at around four a m.
Speaker 1: According to court documentary.
Speaker 2: You know, it's really funny that all these things nowadays
Speaker 2: provide a digital footprint like door dash, you know, ring camera, yes,
Speaker 2: door dash, even the food truck has apparently is live
Speaker 2: streaming or whatever.
Speaker 1: I do know, honestly, I was thinking about this in
Speaker 1: this case because the digital footprint is so interesting on
Speaker 1: how they tracked Brian Coberger back to this crime, and
Speaker 1: it made me think it's really difficult to commit crimes now.
Speaker 2: Well, certain crimes apparently you can push someone off a cliff.
Speaker 3: As well as you're.
Speaker 1: On these trails.
Speaker 2: Everything here is going to be like modern day like tracking, right, That's.
Speaker 3: How they got to Ghettle.
Speaker 1: So the third floor of the house house gone Calvez
Speaker 1: and her dog in one room, and then Mogan was
Speaker 1: in another bedroom. Yet the night when the murders occurred,
Speaker 1: the two of them were sleeping in the same bed
Speaker 1: when they were murdered, and the dog was in the
Speaker 1: other room. Cernodle and Shapin were on the second floor,
Speaker 1: and so was Mortensen, and Mortenson was the one that lived.
Speaker 1: According to the affidavit, Funk was alone occupant on the
Speaker 1: first floor, where the front door was Around four am
Speaker 1: Mortenson woke up to noises up stairs, and she told
Speaker 1: police she thought gon Kalviz was playing with her dog
Speaker 1: on the third floor. Then she heard crying coming from
Speaker 1: the direction of Kernodle's room and looked outside once more.
Speaker 1: From above, she then felt like she heard a male
Speaker 1: voice that was in shape and saying something to the
Speaker 1: effect of it's okay, I'm going to help you. This
Speaker 1: is all according to the affidavit that was filed, it's
Speaker 1: not clear where the male's voice was coming from. Mortensen
Speaker 1: heard crying again and open the door. I think this
Speaker 1: is the third time. She opens the door, and this
Speaker 1: time when she opens the door, she sees a figure
Speaker 1: clad in black clothing with a mask covering their mouth
Speaker 1: and nose, walking forward towards her. Then she freezes, is
Speaker 1: what she says. She's just stand there shot and he
Speaker 1: walks past her and goes out the sliding door. Mortensen
Speaker 1: froze and the person walked past her.
Speaker 2: That begs questions, Well, there's a lot of which we
Speaker 2: don't have answers. Why didn't he attack her, right? You know,
Speaker 2: he probably knew he was covered so she couldn't identify him,
Speaker 2: so maybe, but but why did he kill someone not
Speaker 2: the others?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 2: Maybe that wasn't part of the plan, Like she sprung
Speaker 2: on him and he thought, so, this wasn't part of
Speaker 2: his plan. He thought he already executed everything, and then
Speaker 2: he didn't want to improvise his you know, a fifth murder.
Speaker 1: Right around four seventeen am, a security camera less than
Speaker 1: fifty feet from Kernodle's bedroom wall picked up distorted audio
Speaker 1: of what sounded like voices or a whimper followed by
Speaker 1: a loud thud. According to the Affid David, a dog
Speaker 1: can also be heard barking. Okay, I have a lot
Speaker 1: of questions about what happened that night.
Speaker 3: The dog did not die.
Speaker 1: Correct, No, the dog did not die.
Speaker 3: So what did the dog provide a statement?
Speaker 1: The dog did not provide a statement. I have so
Speaker 1: many questions though. First of all, let me just ask you,
Speaker 1: do you think he was targeting all of the students
Speaker 1: in that house or do you think he went in
Speaker 1: to kill one and then was surprised that they were
Speaker 1: sharing a bedroom, and then he felt like he had
Speaker 1: to kill the other one, and then maybe he heard
Speaker 1: some the noises and then had to go to the
Speaker 1: other room and kill them and then was surprised that
Speaker 1: there was a boyfriend there and then had to kill him.
Speaker 1: And he ends up killing four people, but only but
Speaker 1: not with the intent to kill all the Do you
Speaker 1: know what I mean?
Speaker 3: I have no idea how, but I know what he
Speaker 3: was thinking.
Speaker 1: I don't know, but I'm just that's what goes on simplify.
Speaker 2: You're saying, was he trying to kill one person and
Speaker 2: then Moore got mixed in them?
Speaker 1: Yeah, because the two girls were sharing a room and
Speaker 1: they normally don't share a room. So my question is
Speaker 1: was he targeting one of those girls? Possibly he comes
Speaker 1: into the house, he comes in clad in black, he
Speaker 1: has the knife, he kills one of the girls, and
Speaker 1: then he's like, and then there's another one in the
Speaker 1: bed they're sleeping in the end, was.
Speaker 3: He stalking one of them? Do we know that?
Speaker 1: We don't know that. I did read that apparently Brian
Speaker 1: Coberger was a vegan and he frequented a Greek restaurant
Speaker 1: where Maddie and Kayley worked. And we assume, or I've
Speaker 1: read it somewhere, there's some assumption that he or allegedly
Speaker 1: he was following them on instant and I had read somewhere,
Speaker 1: and if anyone is out there listening and you you're
Speaker 1: more clear on this. I know that I have read
Speaker 1: somewhere that they did find some DMS. Not that she
Speaker 1: had answered, but he had DMed her just kind of like, hey,
Speaker 1: what's up, like slid into I can't remember if it
Speaker 1: was Maddie or Kaylee, but had slid into.
Speaker 3: Their Nonetheless, there's some connection.
Speaker 2: He saw two of the girls at some restaurant that
Speaker 2: he frequented, and then he he there was a connection
Speaker 2: on Instagram to him and the household.
Speaker 1: Right, So my question is, and I know I'm.
Speaker 2: Into So they didn't go to the same school or anything,
Speaker 2: They had no other ties together.
Speaker 1: No, he was he was a PhD student in Washington State,
Speaker 1: and then they were all Idaho University of Idaho students
Speaker 1: like undergrad and he was in the PhD program and
Speaker 1: criminology elsewhere elsewhere. Okay, First of all, I also have
Speaker 1: to say that this case, me reading this case and
Speaker 1: researching this case, I didn't realize how bad a geography
Speaker 1: I am because I had no idea that Washington State
Speaker 1: bordered Idaho. I know you're looking at me like I'm
Speaker 1: an idiot, but I did not know that Idaho had
Speaker 1: that top part that goes up.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like a chimney that goes up and borders Washington.
Speaker 1: Because when I kept reading that they were only like
Speaker 1: ten miles apart, these two college campuses, one in Washington
Speaker 1: State and one in Idaho, I'm like, how are they
Speaker 1: ten miles apart? How is Washington ten miles from Idaho?
Speaker 1: Apparently they border each other and I didn't even know
Speaker 1: that anyway. Back, I just had to throw that in there.
Speaker 2: Legally, Brunette, it's not geography, Brunette exactly.
Speaker 1: I had no idea anyway. Apparently he had frequently topography topography.
Speaker 3: Geography is more like the rocks in the lands.
Speaker 1: Okay, anyway, now I know they order each other. He
Speaker 1: apparently had followed these girls on Instagram and had DMed
Speaker 1: one of them a few times, so he knew who
Speaker 1: they were. I would be under the assumption that he
Speaker 1: possibly followed them home and that's how he knew where
Speaker 1: they lived.
Speaker 3: Yeah, at some point I'm sure he did.
Speaker 2: Yeah, right, If it was targeted, then he had to
Speaker 2: have done that.
Speaker 1: So then back to my question was did he target
Speaker 1: one of the girls or both the girls? And then
Speaker 1: end up killing four people that night because he wasn't
Speaker 1: aware that there were so many people up at that
Speaker 1: time or whatever. Anyway, what's interesting is I feel like
Speaker 1: a lot of these gaps in this case will be
Speaker 1: filled in when he goes to trial. All Right, So
Speaker 1: at four twenty am, Mortensen started frantically calling her roommates Kernodle, Gone, Kalvez,
Speaker 1: then back to Kernodle again. She called Mogan, that's Mattie
Speaker 1: Mogan again before texting Bethany Funk. Bethany Funk is another
Speaker 1: one that is does not perish that night, and she
Speaker 1: says no one is answering. Bethany then had also tried
Speaker 1: calling Maddie and Kaylee and Shapin. During that time, Kaylee
Speaker 1: Mortensen texted to her what's going on? The text message
Speaker 1: remained unanswered. Investigators believe the four roommates were killed sometime
Speaker 1: between four am and four twenty five AM. So basically
Speaker 1: there's the door dash order at four, then there's some noises.
Speaker 1: They're texting their roommates asking them what's going on. Then
Speaker 1: at four to twenty five. I believe they know a
Speaker 1: four twenty five because this is when they catch the
Speaker 1: white Alantra on surveillance video leaving at a rapid rate
Speaker 1: from their house. Yeah, so he basically entered the home
Speaker 1: murdered four people with a k bar knife within a
Speaker 1: twenty minute timeframe.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean, I guess, well, it has to be I mean,
Speaker 2: I hate song and on two different floors. It has
Speaker 2: to be kind of quick because people are going to run, right,
Speaker 2: so kind of. I mean, he's gruesome anyway, clearly he's
Speaker 2: a nut, so it's not you, and I think, like,
Speaker 2: that's horrific.
Speaker 3: I could never do that in twenty minutes.
Speaker 2: But he had to do it quick otherwise others would
Speaker 2: wake up, call the police, they would run.
Speaker 3: So I had to be executed really quickly.
Speaker 1: Okay, here's my other question, and this is another thing
Speaker 1: that goes on in my head. There's four people. There's
Speaker 1: two in a room, two in another room. They had
Speaker 1: to have been so intoxicated that they didn't make a
Speaker 1: lot of noise.
Speaker 2: I mean, I know it's college and this and nan,
Speaker 2: you know they're out getting isolated.
Speaker 1: No, I mean they were out, both of them. One
Speaker 1: was at a frat The two were at a frat party.
Speaker 1: The other one was at a bar. I mean, clearly
Speaker 1: they were.
Speaker 2: Intoxicated, okay, level of intoxication.
Speaker 1: But I'm just saying for a man to overcome two
Speaker 1: girls and then to move to another bedroom and a
Speaker 1: girl and her boyfriend with little to no noise, I mean,
Speaker 1: the other two that are survivors, they don't hear screaming,
Speaker 1: they don't hear fighting, they don't there's not furniture being overturned.
Speaker 3: I don't know, I haven't.
Speaker 1: I mean, all they here is some slight whimpering voice.
Speaker 2: I remember in the beginning, I had the prejudgment of, oh,
Speaker 2: they're probably wasted and they want some time.
Speaker 3: People don't want to call the cops because they'll say they.
Speaker 2: Had drugs in their system or pot or whatever. And
Speaker 2: the other one is they were just kind of not
Speaker 2: all there to be able to quickly react and they
Speaker 2: probably just went back to sleep.
Speaker 1: So you're saying just the alcohol level on all four
Speaker 1: of them probably led to him being able to eat
Speaker 1: A loss one scenario, because I'm just thinking about the
Speaker 1: girlfriend and the boyfriend in the room together and the
Speaker 1: bed together, and if he slips into the room and
Speaker 1: he's murdering, he's got to murder one. What is the
Speaker 1: other one doing. I mean, maybe they're passed out they
Speaker 1: don't notice it.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna tell you. If someone is murdering me
Speaker 1: and we're in bed together, I need you to fight back.
Speaker 3: I'll try to wake up.
Speaker 1: Can you please get up and do something? All right?
Speaker 1: All right?
Speaker 3: Do you mean save him? He'd probably beat the crap
Speaker 3: out of him.
Speaker 1: Probably.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Anyway, let's get back to these text messages. So there's
Speaker 1: a lot of text messages going on between the two
Speaker 1: surviving roommates and the four that are upstairs in the
Speaker 1: second and third floor of the house. Bethany replies yeah, dude, wtf,
Speaker 1: with Mortensen describing some one in quote like a ski
Speaker 1: mask almost so she's so, she's actually texting the other
Speaker 1: roommate saying that she saw someone in a ski mask
Speaker 1: in the house.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and I could see her not wanting to leave
Speaker 3: her room.
Speaker 2: Yeah I would. I don't know if I would. I mean,
Speaker 2: that's pretty frightening. And plus, these homes are like they're
Speaker 2: designed for college students, I think probably, so they're probably
Speaker 2: like hallways and rooms are separated, not like a traditional
Speaker 2: home where there's like a new big front entrance.
Speaker 3: And it's open, so I imagine.
Speaker 2: It was apartment like and they were hiding in their room.
Speaker 1: So the two remaining roommates that are alive continued texting
Speaker 1: back and forth about the man in the hall. There's
Speaker 1: a lot of typos because you can tell they're panicked, right,
Speaker 1: They're just like you know, Bethany says to Dylan, possibly
Speaker 1: intoxicated and intoxicated right stfu. This is after she tells
Speaker 1: her that she saw a man in a ski mask,
Speaker 1: like he had something over his head, forehead and little mouth.
Speaker 1: I'm not kidding. I'm so freaked out, so am I.
Speaker 1: Then Bethany indicated her phone was about to die, and
Speaker 1: so she texted come to my room, which was below
Speaker 1: this is on the first floor, and then she texts run.
Speaker 1: So the defense claims in court documents that Dylan, ultimately,
Speaker 1: so Dylan is the one that saw the man. Dylan's
Speaker 1: the one that opens the door like three different times,
Speaker 1: and on the third time when she opens the door,
Speaker 1: that's when she sees the guy walk by in the
Speaker 1: ski mask. Okay, then she's the one that texts to
Speaker 1: Bethany on the first floor and says, I saw a
Speaker 1: man in a ski mask. And she's like WTF. Then
Speaker 1: she says, come down to my room. Run. So then
Speaker 1: Dylan ends up going to Bethany's room and the two
Speaker 1: of them stay the night on the first floor together.
Speaker 1: They launch another round of calls to their roommates at
Speaker 1: four twenty seven without an answer, and we know, based
Speaker 1: on the timeline already, that their roommates were dead at
Speaker 1: this time. They're calling them, texting them for twenty seven
Speaker 1: please answer, Dylan texts to the roommates upstairs at four
Speaker 1: thirty two am. Prosecutors have indicated that they plan to
Speaker 1: use the testimony of the two surviving roommates and want
Speaker 1: to use their text messages to illustrate the timeline of
Speaker 1: the night. I know that the roommates aren't We know
Speaker 1: they're not involved, but I don't understand, and I'm trying
Speaker 1: to give them grace here, but I don't understand how
Speaker 1: you see a man in your house walk by you
Speaker 1: in a ski mask well, and your roommates are not
Speaker 1: answering or replying, and you go down to your roommate's
Speaker 1: room and you stay the night in the room.
Speaker 2: I don't think the issue is one ran to the
Speaker 2: other's room. The issue is then Chappelle asleep.
Speaker 1: No, they're up there.
Speaker 3: There's a whole stay. No, no, the girl one girl
Speaker 3: went to the other girl's room.
Speaker 2: Yes, stayed the night, stayed the night. Yes, I said,
Speaker 2: how long were they was till the police war notified?
Speaker 1: Yeah, the stays the whole night. And there's a whole
Speaker 1: a digital background. I mean on their phones. They have
Speaker 1: it of them like they one gets on LinkedIn and
Speaker 1: then they're on Snapchat, and then they're on Instagram, and
Speaker 1: then they're back on Snapchat.
Speaker 2: Writs a lot of questions like what the heck? Then
Speaker 2: they went to resume to normal behaviors. They just go
Speaker 2: back to their regular you know, Instagram and whatever.
Speaker 1: I don't know. That's the part where I'm confused. And
Speaker 1: then one of them, I don't remember which one wakes
Speaker 1: up in the morning at seven am and calls their
Speaker 1: mom or calls their dad, and then calls their dad back,
Speaker 1: and then the dad calls. Here's my question, and this
Speaker 1: is another thing that will come out at trial, I
Speaker 1: assume because we don't know this, But what was the
Speaker 1: conversation when she called her home? She she has a
Speaker 1: conversation with her dad at like seven or eight in
Speaker 1: the morning after an after a Saturday night out drinking someone,
Speaker 1: they see a mass man in the house. Their roommates
Speaker 1: aren't answering. Then she has a phone conversation with her dad.
Speaker 1: Was what was in that conversation because they end up
Speaker 1: not calling nine one until someone else comes over to
Speaker 1: the house at noon.
Speaker 3: Okay, so clearly they didn't go into the victim's.
Speaker 1: Rooms, no or yell or yell up for them.
Speaker 2: Well, they tried to call them and no one answered.
Speaker 1: But I'm saying, they're all in the same house. It's level.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 2: Why don't they open the door and be like, hey,
Speaker 2: maybe they just all kind of had their own space
Speaker 2: and they just didn't they thought, Okay, they're sleeping with
Speaker 2: some guy.
Speaker 3: On the mask. I don't know. I don't know how
Speaker 3: what the dynamic is. Is that normal behavior for them?
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: Is it normal behavior to see someone in a mask
Speaker 1: ski mask walking around in your house?
Speaker 3: No? No?
Speaker 1: All right, Well, we know that the defense is clearly
Speaker 1: going to point out that while they're not being able
Speaker 1: to get a hold of their roommates and that they
Speaker 1: saw a mask man intruder in their house, that they
Speaker 1: don't call like.
Speaker 3: They're gonna get a discredit.
Speaker 2: Clearly, maybe this didn't happen because if people saw a
Speaker 2: masked man in the home, they would call the police.
Speaker 3: They instead went on LinkedIn and went to bed, So
Speaker 3: clearly chat and so yeah, is their testimony credible? Right,
Speaker 3: But there's more evidence.
Speaker 1: There's a lot more evidence, I'd say, And I'm not
Speaker 1: questioning their honesty as to like they're just respond I'm
Speaker 1: just questioning. I just I don't understand in what world
Speaker 1: you see an intruder in your home when you're a
Speaker 1: college student, you can't get a hold of your roommates,
Speaker 1: you're scared, and you don't call the police. That's the
Speaker 1: part that I don't understand. But then again, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I've never been in a situation where that happens. So
Speaker 1: maybe there is some kind of fight or flight thing
Speaker 1: that goes on and you are in shock. I don't know.
Speaker 1: A transcript of the Surviving Roommates nine to one one
Speaker 1: call was also released, and the transcript shows the case
Speaker 1: what it was at eleven fifty six, am.
Speaker 3: Oh my gosh, like at noon the next day.
Speaker 1: Yes, that's what I just keep saying. Yes, it was
Speaker 1: eight It was eight hours after the murders took place.
Speaker 1: That was finally called what time they wake up? No,
Speaker 1: I just told you. One of them was awake at
Speaker 1: seven I believe it was seven am and she was
Speaker 1: making phone calls to her dad.
Speaker 2: She just stayed awake for four hours before she called,
Speaker 2: four or five hours.
Speaker 1: They might have fallen asleep in there a little bit. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they for an hour or so.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: That's why I'm saying the trial will be very interesting
Speaker 1: because I feel like a lot of these questions and
Speaker 1: these gaps.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we're going to witnesses.
Speaker 1: They're going to be witnesses, and it will be really
Speaker 1: interesting to hear these gaps filled in. What was the
Speaker 1: conversation about what was your mental state during that time?
Speaker 1: Why did you not?
Speaker 2: There is going to try to poke holes in that.
Speaker 2: But there's still DNA evidence, yes, and there's his car
Speaker 2: roaming around the cellular usage.
Speaker 1: Right, all right, let's get to how Brian was actually caught.
Speaker 1: So the DNA evidence in this case is really interesting
Speaker 1: to me. So they found a knife sheath that was
Speaker 1: left behind, and again the knife she is interesting to
Speaker 1: me because Brian allegedly shows up. He murders four people.
Speaker 1: He's a criminals he's working on his PhD in criminology.
Speaker 1: So we're not talking about someone that's.
Speaker 2: I'm going to talk about a low level and experienced,
Speaker 2: uneducated murder.
Speaker 1: You're talking about someone who's crime and crime scene is
Speaker 1: their passion. And I don't know how you show up
Speaker 1: to a murder you have You have a knife, that's it.
Speaker 1: You have a ski mask and a knife. And how
Speaker 1: you leave the knife sheath behind when that's all you're carrying.
Speaker 1: It's not like you have a purse and a wallet
Speaker 1: and a backpack and a bunch of stuff that you're handling. Well,
Speaker 1: I mean maybe he did.
Speaker 3: He's also committing four murders.
Speaker 1: That's a lot.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's kind of hard to maybe manage your yeah, multitask, right.
Speaker 1: So the knife sheath on this k bar knife which
Speaker 1: I actually looked up an image of it. It's a
Speaker 1: big knife.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's like a knife.
Speaker 1: It is, it's it's the knife sheath itself, says.
Speaker 3: Usmc on it.
Speaker 2: I had that knife and this house, like let's say
Speaker 2: it just bought one and I had it. You would
Speaker 2: quickly identify as what the heck is this knife? Where
Speaker 2: did you get it?
Speaker 3: Why do we have? What do you need it for?
Speaker 3: It's not like it would just get mixed with all
Speaker 3: or other the kitchen knife, right, No, But.
Speaker 2: I mean it's it's not It's not to say there's
Speaker 2: not a reason to have the knife. It's not like, oh,
Speaker 2: if you have the knife, you're a murderer. But it's
Speaker 2: not a typical knife to have, and so you better
Speaker 2: have an explanation for it.
Speaker 3: Yeah. If I had the knife in the home and
Speaker 3: you asked about it, he's like, Oh, I don't know.
Speaker 3: I just thought it was kind of cool.
Speaker 2: It was on sale, Like, it doesn't make sense. You
Speaker 2: would be like, what's the reason for this knife?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 2: And I could say collecting, hunting, but I'd have to
Speaker 2: have a reason. It's not just you never know, I
Speaker 2: just got a knife. So what's his reasoning? Because there's
Speaker 2: history he bought that. He bought that same knife too, Do.
Speaker 3: You know that? Yes?
Speaker 1: And I was going to get to that, but that
Speaker 1: is more of the evidence that they have against him.
Speaker 1: They did find through his digital footprint he purchased the
Speaker 1: knife with the sheaf and the knife sharpener.
Speaker 3: Were they separate items?
Speaker 1: Yeah? On Amazon, and I believe he I believe they
Speaker 1: were purchased eight months prior to the murder.
Speaker 2: Yes, that sounds about right, But I know that the
Speaker 2: Amazon account is a family account, and so there's issues
Speaker 2: with expectation of privacy from the others. And it's also well,
Speaker 2: who bought the knife?
Speaker 3: But that's the thing. He needs to have an explanation
Speaker 3: for that knife. Yeah, yeah, he does.
Speaker 2: You mean if he wants to explain his reason, Like
Speaker 2: if I'm at the scene of a crime about the
Speaker 2: times of the murder, but I didn't commit the murder, well,
Speaker 2: I'm going to have an explanation as.
Speaker 3: To why I was there. He has to have an
Speaker 3: explanation as to why. Oh and the what's the knife
Speaker 3: cover called a sheath? A sheath, so the sheath? Does
Speaker 3: he have the sheath.
Speaker 2: Or does he only have the knife or neither? So
Speaker 2: if he an explanation, here, an explanation for why he
Speaker 2: bought the knife, an explanation as to if he doesn't
Speaker 2: have the knie because he liked to throw it out right,
Speaker 2: he's hiding it's evidence.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and the.
Speaker 1: Sheath Okay, but we're gonna get more into this knife
Speaker 1: because there's new evidence that has come out recently.
Speaker 3: Okay, we'll tell me.
Speaker 1: Okay that this is why the defense is trying to
Speaker 1: suppress his Amazon his digital footprint is Amazon purchase because
Speaker 1: apparently after the murders, he was looking for a replacement
Speaker 1: knife because the knife was never found.
Speaker 2: Well, someone on the Amazon account was looking for the knife. Oh,
Speaker 2: so the thinking is, oh, my gosh, I better have
Speaker 2: a new knife to kind of explain that.
Speaker 3: See.
Speaker 2: Look, there's no blood on here, there's no anything this
Speaker 2: and I have the sheath that's you know, and everything.
Speaker 1: So the sheath is found in the bed, and the
Speaker 1: sheath has some DNA on it on the on the
Speaker 1: button part of the sheath. The knife has never been found.
Speaker 1: I've read, I've heard of thought. I've heard people say
Speaker 1: that possibly he got rid of the murder weapon and
Speaker 1: that drive between going yeah, probably because I guess you
Speaker 1: pass a river it's called Snake River or something that
Speaker 1: he could have thrown it into the river. Now there's
Speaker 1: new evidence that's come forward that the defense is obviously
Speaker 1: trying to suppress. But it's that he after the murders,
Speaker 1: was looking at that same k bar knife. So if
Speaker 1: the knife is missing and the sheath was found, is
Speaker 1: he trying to purchase the knife again to say, hey,
Speaker 1: I do have it. It's right here. I didn't use
Speaker 1: it in a murder. I have it. It's in my house.
Speaker 3: So that's what he was trying to do.
Speaker 1: So there's that.
Speaker 3: That's why I said you have to have an explanation
Speaker 3: for the knife or the missing knife.
Speaker 2: He is trying to buy it, but did he buy it? No,
Speaker 2: it was just a search history. I think I believe
Speaker 2: it was.
Speaker 1: A search history, and I don't know. I couldn't tell
Speaker 1: if if they could tell from this digital footprint if
Speaker 1: it was purchased, or they can only tell that he
Speaker 1: was looking at it in order.
Speaker 3: Well, I mean.
Speaker 1: Speculation.
Speaker 2: We're speculating, and an argument could be made someone in
Speaker 2: the household was looking at it, maybe because he took
Speaker 2: the knife, and someone.
Speaker 1: Else where maybe because the dagerating.
Speaker 3: About my knife is missing. I'm going to get a
Speaker 3: new one. The son, did you you borrowed my knife?
Speaker 3: Did you? I needed to put it back? Yeah? Wow,
Speaker 3: all right, so just wait to you know, this is
Speaker 3: where I get it beyond a reasonable doubt. But there's
Speaker 3: so many coincidences where it's like this is not normal.
Speaker 2: Now you're purchasing the same knife and yours is missing,
Speaker 2: and you're driving around these girls' homes.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's just so not I don't know.
Speaker 1: Well, he's innocent until proven guilty, but let's just keep going.
Speaker 1: Because there is DNA that's found on the knife sheath.
Speaker 1: The DNA in this in this case is really interesting
Speaker 1: to me because they ran the DNA into the national
Speaker 1: FBI database, which is COTIS, and they get no hits.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because he's never had a crime before, right to
Speaker 2: be in the system.
Speaker 1: Right. So it says the first investigator submitted the DNA
Speaker 1: to the FBI database CODIS, but when that didn't turn
Speaker 1: up a match, investigators turned to genetic genealogy. It actually
Speaker 1: has a name which is really interesting. It's called IgG.
Speaker 1: It's investigated genetic genealogy. And I think this is going
Speaker 1: to be something that's more prevalent because now there's all
Speaker 1: these DNA databases like twenty three and meters and these
Speaker 1: heritage databases. And what they did was they took the
Speaker 1: DNA and because they got no hits and CODIS, they
Speaker 1: ran it through it.
Speaker 3: They found family members.
Speaker 1: They found family members in these genealogy databases, and they
Speaker 1: got a hit with the dad. I believe. Then I
Speaker 1: think they followed him because he takes a road trip
Speaker 1: after the murders are committed. He and his dad take
Speaker 1: a road trip in December and they drive from Washington,
Speaker 1: where he goes to college in this PhD criminology program.
Speaker 1: They drive his white Alantra to Pennsylvania where his family
Speaker 1: home is. I believe the police followed him or kept
Speaker 1: track of him somehow they knew that he was going
Speaker 1: to be home in Pennsylvania. And then they go through
Speaker 1: the trash and they find more DNA and they make
Speaker 1: a match, so they're using this genealogy type of genetic
Speaker 1: DNA research. They get the dad, there's a hit, They
Speaker 1: find his FAMI family, They follow him to his family home.
Speaker 1: They go through the trash again. There's no expectation of
Speaker 1: privacy and trash, right, you put trash out on the
Speaker 1: side of the road.
Speaker 2: It's not an illegal circh. I read something. Yeah, once
Speaker 2: you put it in the trash, it's fair game. But
Speaker 2: I think I read something that they use the trash
Speaker 2: service to go collect the trash because it was in
Speaker 2: a gated community, and I guess police didn't have the
Speaker 2: ability to get in or they just chose to have
Speaker 2: the garbage person go and like retrieve it, like hey,
Speaker 2: give us that trash over there. And so then the
Speaker 2: idea is, yeah, is there an expectation of privacy or something?
Speaker 3: You know, I think that's going to fall flat.
Speaker 1: But yeah, you know, I do know. The defense filed
Speaker 1: a motion to suppress or to throw out the evidence
Speaker 1: with the genealogy, and that's also going to be another issue.
Speaker 1: I know they've hired they've brought someone onto the defense
Speaker 1: team which is an expert in the DNA and the
Speaker 1: genealogy and all that, because they're going to try and
Speaker 1: definitely use that to tear apart but to.
Speaker 2: Do what I mean, DNA's DNA. So what's the argument
Speaker 2: to be made?
Speaker 1: I you know, because they're gonna they're going to try
Speaker 1: and say that they you know, didn't do the right things,
Speaker 1: They didn't test it enough. Was there tainted in the testing?
Speaker 1: I don't know, you know, but.
Speaker 2: It was the DNA on the knife cover was trace
Speaker 2: evidence or trace DNA, meaning he just put his thumbprint
Speaker 2: and just left some DNA. It wasn't blood, so you
Speaker 2: can't It's not very easy to transfer trace DNA from
Speaker 2: one source to another without any other DNA also being
Speaker 2: put on there.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so that's I think that's going to fall flat too.
Speaker 2: I think they're going to try to poke all these holes,
Speaker 2: but I don't think anyone's going to buy it.
Speaker 1: I do believe that in these preliminary motions they tried
Speaker 1: to they filed emotion to suppress the genealogy part of
Speaker 1: it the DNA because they were saying it was unconstitutional.
Speaker 1: But the question is, is when you give your DNA
Speaker 1: to these databases.
Speaker 3: Is it public?
Speaker 2: Is does it expectation and privacy remain when I submit
Speaker 2: my saliva for a DNA test?
Speaker 1: Right? And I believe what the judge said is when
Speaker 1: you're when you're giving your DNA to a third party,
Speaker 1: there's no expectation of privacy.
Speaker 3: No, you're in a freaking database.
Speaker 1: Right, all right. Investigators then built a family tree of
Speaker 1: hundreds of relatives using the same tools and methods used
Speaker 1: by members of the public who wish to learn more
Speaker 1: about their ancestors. So this is how so. The FBI
Speaker 1: investigators then sent local law enforcement a tip to investigate Coburger.
Speaker 1: After law enforcement obtained the DNA from Coburger's father and
Speaker 1: later they got a cheek swab from Coburger, which I
Speaker 1: assume they got a warrant at that point. At that
Speaker 1: point to get the cheap the cheek swab from him directly.
Speaker 1: I assume they submitted an affidavit with all of these things,
Speaker 1: as far as the DNA on the sheaf, the genealogy
Speaker 1: it hit on the dad, They got the you know,
Speaker 1: the DNA from the trash, It all matched. And now
Speaker 1: they got a cheek swamp from Coburger, and they found
Speaker 1: that there was a statistical match showing it was overwhelmingly
Speaker 1: likely that the DNA found on the knife sheath match Coburger's.
Speaker 1: So that's where the DNA came to play. We talked
Speaker 1: about this a little bit, but let's just make this
Speaker 1: Let's just go into a little more detail about his
Speaker 1: purchases prior to the murders. The state has revealed new evidence.
Speaker 1: It plans to present a trial that includes a purchase
Speaker 1: record from Dick's Sporting Goods that prosecutors say shows that
Speaker 1: Coburger bought the black And I didn't know what this was.
Speaker 1: I never heard of this before, but I guess this
Speaker 1: ski mask he had on is called Bala clava.
Speaker 3: It has an opening, fat eyes. It doesn't have like.
Speaker 1: Two circles, right, So I actually googled that because I
Speaker 1: never heard of it before, and it showed up on Revolve.
Speaker 1: So Revolved, which I ordered from eight thousand times a
Speaker 1: day Carrie's.
Speaker 3: So they sell a murder kit.
Speaker 1: They sell murder kits on Revolve, and.
Speaker 3: They have a good return policy. They have an.
Speaker 1: Amazing return So he could have worn it, yeah, returned
Speaker 1: it that night, put it back in the box, put
Speaker 1: the shipping label on, and sent the mass back.
Speaker 2: And I think one of the uh surviving roommates she
Speaker 2: drew what kind of mask he wore.
Speaker 1: She did match that type exactly. It's that open, just
Speaker 1: like you said.
Speaker 3: The one ninja. You look like a ninja, right, So.
Speaker 1: The same type of mass was described by a surviving roommate,
Speaker 1: and she also, like you just said, in a police sketch,
Speaker 1: she claimed she saw a man wearing a black ski
Speaker 1: mask inside the King Rode home the night of the killings.
Speaker 1: She also said that she could tell that he had
Speaker 1: bushy eyebrows.
Speaker 3: Yeah, which that.
Speaker 1: Comes into play later because apparently he took a selfie
Speaker 1: the morning after the murders.
Speaker 3: And does he not have bushy eyebrows. He does, Oh
Speaker 3: he does? He shaved him or something.
Speaker 1: No, no, So this a selfie that he took the
Speaker 1: morning after the murders. I believe it was like they
Speaker 1: found it in his phone, you know, evidence that apparently
Speaker 1: he took it around ten am or something like that.
Speaker 1: He's like freshly showered, you know, just just committed the
Speaker 1: perfect murder. I'm going to take a selfie as a
Speaker 1: thumbs up, right, he has like there's like a shower
Speaker 1: head in the background, but.
Speaker 3: There's a shower.
Speaker 1: He jumped inaid okay, Yeah, So he takes a shower,
Speaker 1: he cleans off all the evidence, apparently allegedly, and then
Speaker 1: he takes his selfie around ten am I believe was
Speaker 1: the time frame. This is after the murders. He's clean,
Speaker 1: he's got his bushy eyebrows, and he's got a thumbs up.
Speaker 1: So I know the prosecution wants to enter this selfie
Speaker 1: into evidence to show to corroborate that she said the
Speaker 1: man she saw had bushy eyebrows, and here we have
Speaker 1: a selfie up all close in time with the bushy eyebrows. So,
Speaker 1: in addition, investigators found a k bar military knife sheath,
Speaker 1: which we knew and though the knife itself is still missing,
Speaker 1: which we think possibly he got rid of it maybe
Speaker 1: in the river. Prosecutors say Coburger bought a k bar
Speaker 1: knife eight months before the killings. So we have the
Speaker 1: DNA evidence and we also have the car act. So
Speaker 1: state prosecutors presented a map detailing what they say are
Speaker 1: the times and locations Coburger's vehicle was picked up on
Speaker 1: surveillance video near the crime scene. After reviewing several videos
Speaker 1: obtained from the area near the crime scene, authority saw
Speaker 1: the suspects vehicle later determined to be a twenty fifteen
Speaker 1: white Hyundai Elantra multiple times between three twenty nine am
Speaker 1: and four to twenty am on the day of the attack. So,
Speaker 1: like we said earlier, there's ring footage of this car
Speaker 1: and they live on this house. The murder house is
Speaker 1: on a dead end.
Speaker 3: So you're definitely not driving by, right, so it's not
Speaker 3: like you're just.
Speaker 1: Driving by, you're going pass, you're turning. I think they
Speaker 1: have video surveillance of him doing a three point turn,
Speaker 1: and then there's surveillance of him at like four twenty
Speaker 1: five am or something leaving quickly in this car investigators
Speaker 1: found out that Coburger had registered the twenty fifteen white
Speaker 1: Alantra in Washington on November eighteen, five days after the killings.
Speaker 1: So this is interesting because I was thinking, did he
Speaker 1: purposefully not register his vehicle in Washington, because in Washington
Speaker 1: then you have to have a plate on the front
Speaker 1: and the back of the car. His car was registered
Speaker 1: in Pennsylvania, where he's from, and he had no front
Speaker 1: license plate. So do you think that he I mean,
Speaker 1: he's a criminology major. He's getting a PhD. So I
Speaker 1: thought he was thinking he was out smarting police by
Speaker 1: not having a front license plate and not registering his
Speaker 1: car in Washington.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but you're making a connection. He didn't register so
Speaker 2: you wouldn't have to put a plate on. Amazing, Well,
Speaker 2: was it criminal you would just not put a plate on,
Speaker 2: Like all of a sudden, He's like, oh, I got
Speaker 2: to follow the local state highway rules.
Speaker 1: Well, what's the what's his reasoning for waiting five days
Speaker 1: after the murders to then register his car in Washington.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying, if you are meticulously planning a murder
Speaker 1: and you buy the murder weapon eight months before, and
Speaker 1: you and you purchased this ski mask, and you've gone by,
Speaker 1: and there there is I don't know if I already
Speaker 1: said this, but there they picked up on his cell
Speaker 1: phone where he had driven by this residence twelve times
Speaker 1: prior to that night. Yeah, so he's canvassing this house.
Speaker 1: And every time they picked him he pinged, you know,
Speaker 1: near their house on his phone. It was at nighttime
Speaker 1: or early morning. So it's not like he's driving by
Speaker 1: because he's I don't know.
Speaker 3: Business being on that street right in the middle of
Speaker 3: the night.
Speaker 1: Right. So my point is, if this man is meticulously
Speaker 1: planning a murdery, is a criminology.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, but he still makes mistakes. He left the
Speaker 3: knife cover, I.
Speaker 1: Know he made, like the most basic one. He left
Speaker 1: the murder weapon behind, yeah, or not the weapon, but
Speaker 1: the sheath he left it behind. I don't know. I
Speaker 1: was just thinking that the license plate in registering the
Speaker 1: car was probably some thought that he had that he
Speaker 1: was evading police in some type of manner. Anyway, that's
Speaker 1: just me.
Speaker 3: But again, when he goes down. You also thought Washington
Speaker 3: and Idaho were far apart. I did.
Speaker 1: I thought? I thought I thought Idaho was like I
Speaker 1: thought Idaho was in the southern United States, Like, I
Speaker 1: thought Idaho was down by Utah. Isn't.
Speaker 3: Well, it touches Utah also.
Speaker 1: But I thought it was below Utah. I didn't really.
Speaker 3: Oh wow, yeah, no, way off. That's why I drive everywhere.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's why when you're like I'll be home in
Speaker 2: ten minutes and it's thirty four minutes later. Where exactly,
Speaker 2: And then you're like, I need gas again, I'm like, already,
Speaker 2: I just drive a lot.
Speaker 3: Yes, you do.
Speaker 1: Also, I read that this is interesting. You'll find this interesting.
Speaker 1: Are you listening? Are you paying attention? In Idaho, where
Speaker 1: he's being tried, the state requires that if you're going
Speaker 1: to use an alibi defense that you have to well,
Speaker 1: you have to file that prior to the trial. I
Speaker 1: want a surprise, you can't do a surprise alibi, you
Speaker 1: have to file. So basically, defence has filed an alibi
Speaker 1: that he was driving around the night of the murders
Speaker 1: because he likes to look at the stars. So basically
Speaker 1: what they've done is take the evidence that the prosecution
Speaker 1: has and then you formulate you turn it around and
Speaker 1: formulate an alibi around that, and it's their alibi is
Speaker 1: he was alone in his car driving around, But he
Speaker 1: does that a lot because he likes to just drive around.
Speaker 3: This was in November.
Speaker 2: I wonder if it was like overcast and stuff, because
Speaker 2: that would be easy to be like, really, there's no stars,
Speaker 2: it was overcast that night.
Speaker 3: Well, no, he drove.
Speaker 1: I mean he drove by their house twelve times between
Speaker 1: June and November.
Speaker 3: Oh, so he's this dead end has a really good
Speaker 3: showing of the star. Right.
Speaker 1: I love to drive down this dead end and look
Speaker 1: at the stars and the hiking trails. On November thirteenth,
Speaker 1: the suspect's phone was near his home in Pullman, Washington,
Speaker 1: that's where he's in the PhD program at two forty
Speaker 1: seven am, but did not appear on a network again
Speaker 1: until approximately four forty eight am, when it was detected
Speaker 1: near Blaine, which is south of Moscow, Idaho, where the
Speaker 1: murders took place. Basically, what he has done you can
Speaker 1: tell is he shut his phone off between two forty
Speaker 1: seven am and four forty eight because there's no cell phone.
Speaker 3: Data, which is more suspicious.
Speaker 1: Right, So I'm saying again he's trying to elude police
Speaker 1: by turning.
Speaker 2: It's like when the criminal wants to elud police and
Speaker 2: all of a sudden they got their car like completely detailed, right,
Speaker 2: you know, and it's like the guy will be like, yeah,
Speaker 2: he's my neighbor. I've never seen him wash his car
Speaker 2: in ten years, and all of a sudden he got
Speaker 2: a detail service.
Speaker 1: Yeah all right. Or when there's a murder on the
Speaker 1: carpet and they rip the carpet out, your new carpet,
Speaker 1: yffe area, I just need a new carpet throughout the
Speaker 1: entire house. So anyway, what he's done is he has
Speaker 1: all this cell phone data right it's pinging, pinging, And
Speaker 1: then between the timeframe of the murders there's no cell phone.
Speaker 1: He turns his phone off, I know.
Speaker 3: And it's like when people burn a house down to
Speaker 3: hide a murder. Yeah, it actually.
Speaker 2: Creates more evidence because you can see that it was
Speaker 2: like an arson and it started over here and like
Speaker 2: and then it's like, oh, they use this gas can,
Speaker 2: then they can find out where the gas get was.
Speaker 3: Bot I always like.
Speaker 1: When people burn a house down to cover up a murder,
Speaker 1: but then they find the body in the house and
Speaker 1: it has like a bullet hole in the body and
Speaker 1: you're like and.
Speaker 2: And it creates more evidence for them to find someone
Speaker 2: because now there's an arson case.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, they just created it.
Speaker 3: They create more evidence.
Speaker 2: So here he is creating more evidence like turning his
Speaker 2: phone off, which you know, kind of lets you know
Speaker 2: what he was thinking or what he was planning, or
Speaker 2: where it was turned off and where it was turned
Speaker 2: back on.
Speaker 1: So the lack of phone data during this crucial time
Speaker 1: period is consistent with Coburger attempting to conceal his location
Speaker 1: during the quadruple homicide. This is what investigators determine. Less
Speaker 1: than four hours later, between ninety twelve and nine twenty
Speaker 1: one am, Coburger's phone was detected near the crime scene
Speaker 1: again in Idaho, which suggests he returned to the area
Speaker 1: after allegedly killing the four students. This is my question.
Speaker 1: Did he go back to the crime scene because his
Speaker 1: usually do, But why did he? Why did he not
Speaker 1: turn his cell phone off? Then if he's turned his
Speaker 1: cell phone off the night of the murders, so there's
Speaker 1: no cell phone data, but then he goes back the
Speaker 1: next morning, why did he not turn his cell phone
Speaker 1: off again?
Speaker 2: He's he he could have simply forgot. He could alsop
Speaker 2: the crimes already done, so they're.
Speaker 3: Not going to look at my data after I don't
Speaker 3: know who knows.
Speaker 1: Do you think he went back to look for the
Speaker 1: knife sheath? I mean, what's he gonna do go in
Speaker 1: the house in the morning.
Speaker 3: Excuse me, excuse.
Speaker 1: Me, I left something.
Speaker 3: I don't know. I don't know, I don't know. There's
Speaker 3: also do you think he's going to change somebody? Do
Speaker 3: you think he's going to testify? You think this is
Speaker 3: the kind of guy that's like, no, no.
Speaker 1: I tell you he won't testify because well, first of all,
Speaker 1: I've learned that he's on the spectrum, and that's that's
Speaker 1: a defense that they that the defense is going to
Speaker 1: use for the weak defense.
Speaker 2: You know why, Well, because he's a PhD mate, he's
Speaker 2: pursuing a PhD, and he's going to claim like I'm
Speaker 2: not all there.
Speaker 1: No, I don't think they're going to use autism as
Speaker 1: as a defense. They're going to use autism as if
Speaker 1: he's convicted that they can't give him the death penalty
Speaker 1: because it's and unusual unusual punishment with someone too.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well killing four people, and.
Speaker 1: I get it, but I if he's autistic, and I
Speaker 1: do believe that I've read that he suffers with depression
Speaker 1: and that he wrote something about not having emotions and
Speaker 1: not being able to show emotions.
Speaker 3: How can you be depressed if you don't have emotions.
Speaker 1: Well, you can be depressed and sad. He had a
Speaker 1: heroin addiction. I mean, he's got all kinds of Yeah,
Speaker 1: he had a heroin addiction because apparently he was depressed,
Speaker 1: so he did heroin. And I did read somewhere that
Speaker 1: he wrote something online about not having feelings and emotions.
Speaker 1: And I'm just saying, someone like that, with that kind
Speaker 1: of intense stare, with no emotions, you can't put someone
Speaker 1: on the stand like that. They're gonna come off callous
Speaker 1: and cold. And he's got bushy eyebrows, like.
Speaker 3: You're you're not put someone on the stand and it's
Speaker 3: not going to be favorable, is what you're saying.
Speaker 1: Yes, I'm trying to say it and a way, Yeah,
Speaker 1: thank you for saying.
Speaker 3: But he might want to.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but the defense team at the end, well, I
Speaker 1: mean I guess that it is up to him. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't think he will. I think that they would
Speaker 1: talk him out of it and say no way right right.
Speaker 1: I do know because I've watched every episode of Forensic
Speaker 1: Files that when a lot of times murderers go back
Speaker 1: to the crime scene immediately because they like to they
Speaker 1: like to.
Speaker 3: See their work. Yeah, you didn't have to watch the
Speaker 3: files to know that. Well, that's the maintain thing. They
Speaker 3: always return to the scene of the crime, right.
Speaker 1: And I know a lot of times when police are investigating,
Speaker 1: they do a sweep yeah of the scene, right because
Speaker 1: a lot of times the fine.
Speaker 3: Who's suspicious, who's acting odd and stuff, and they can
Speaker 3: or who they.
Speaker 1: See repeatedly in the background or talking or being around anyway.
Speaker 2: Especially if someone like him is talking to the Oh
Speaker 2: wasn't he like talking to the police when he got
Speaker 2: arrested too? And he was all like casual and askaying
Speaker 2: we should go out to coffee, and he was asking
Speaker 2: him questions about their careers and stuff. It's like, dude,
Speaker 2: you were just arrested for murder and you're just like
Speaker 2: curious to know about their careers and you want to
Speaker 2: go have cock with them to talk about things.
Speaker 1: Well, apparently he had applied to like the Pullman, that's
Speaker 1: the city he lived in in Washington, Like he had
Speaker 1: applied to their police department, like he wanted to do
Speaker 1: some kind of research or something, or help them in
Speaker 1: crime scenes or something. So maybe he was just casually
Speaker 1: asking them about their job.
Speaker 3: No, but that's what you would be doing.
Speaker 2: If you're arrested for murder and you didn't commit it,
Speaker 2: then you're just casually making small talk with the police.
Speaker 1: Well, if you were arrested for murder and you're in
Speaker 1: the back of the car and you did not do it,
Speaker 1: what would you be talking about.
Speaker 3: I wouldn't be saying anything. No, No, I don't that.
Speaker 1: You'd be cracking jokes. You'd be like, I didn't push
Speaker 1: her off the cliff. She annoys me, but I didn't
Speaker 1: do that.
Speaker 3: She's always taken selfies.
Speaker 1: All right. Back to Brian Coberger. So this is another
Speaker 1: piece of evidence that I know that the prosecution wants
Speaker 1: to enter. Coburger wrote in twenty twenty while he was
Speaker 1: a student at the Sales University of Pennsylvania this is
Speaker 1: where he got his undergrad degree and criminology, that they
Speaker 1: wanted to introduce this paper he wrote that shows the
Speaker 1: defendant's knowledge of crime scenes. First of all, he's a
Speaker 1: criminology major. Of course, he wrote papers about crime scene
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, the twelve page paper entitled it.
Speaker 2: Was not like he was a theater major and he
Speaker 2: wrote it wrote a script about killing four, you know,
Speaker 2: college students in Idaho.
Speaker 1: I mean, of course he wrote about crime scenes. He's
Speaker 1: getting a PhD in criminology. I mean that's part of
Speaker 1: the scope of his education. But the twelve page paper
Speaker 1: entitled crime Scene Scenario Final used an example of a
Speaker 1: killing at which a knife was a currently used. The
Speaker 1: paper discusses the many steps authorities should take to secure
Speaker 1: and investigate a crime scene, and details the equipment used
Speaker 1: for crime scene investigation, how to collect evidence, and how
Speaker 1: to enter a crime scene to avoid contamination, including wearing
Speaker 1: gloves and other protective equipment. He clearly missed the part
Speaker 1: about leaving behind evidence, though, I feel like he should
Speaker 1: have focused more on taking your crime scene weapon home
Speaker 1: right afterwards. Anything that is fiber free, because you don't
Speaker 1: want to leave fibers and covers the mouth, hair and
Speaker 1: overall body would be helpful in avoiding crime scene contamination
Speaker 1: basically because you don't want to leave DNA behind, right.
Speaker 1: So I guess they want to submit this paper as
Speaker 1: evidence that he's aware of how to not contaminate a
Speaker 1: crime scene. But also it is interesting and we didn't
Speaker 1: talk about this yet because there wasn't. There wasn't And
Speaker 1: they did confiscate his car and they did the whole
Speaker 1: thorough check up with nothing. They found nothing. There was
Speaker 1: no DNA from the from any of the kids, There
Speaker 1: was no blood, there was no there's nothing. So I
Speaker 1: don't know if he did some incredible thorough cleaning of
Speaker 1: the car or or he.
Speaker 3: Wore like a whole suit or something. It dumped.
Speaker 2: It was just completely covered so that there was no
Speaker 2: That means there was no transferring like a fibers from
Speaker 2: their house to his car.
Speaker 1: Right, and he he killed four people with a knife.
Speaker 1: There's blood everywhere. How did he not get any blood
Speaker 1: transferred from these killings in this house to the car
Speaker 1: to the car?
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: You tell me that.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 2: I can only picture he had something like full blown
Speaker 2: like you know, you know Beekeeper's outfit on, like and then.
Speaker 3: He tossed.
Speaker 1: That departed where uh yeah, at the end. Oh it's
Speaker 1: Wahlberg right where he walked to that apartment at the
Speaker 1: end and he's just covered from bad to do with.
Speaker 2: A gun in his hand, right yeah. And then Matt
Speaker 2: David's character is like, oh, man, like, I know where
Speaker 2: this is going.
Speaker 1: But the only thing is she saw him and he
Speaker 1: had the mask on. But I don't think she said
Speaker 1: she said he was dressed in black. It's also dark.
Speaker 1: It's also four.
Speaker 2: Twenty morning, So I imagine she just saw his eyes
Speaker 2: and then slammed the door or whatever.
Speaker 3: I don't imagine she like, you know, looked him up
Speaker 3: and down.
Speaker 1: I don't know all. I just can't get past the
Speaker 1: fact that he stabbed four students and ended up not
Speaker 1: tracking blood anywhere and not having blood in his car.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about what the motive would be. It's unclear
Speaker 1: if Brian Coberger had a motive or knew the victims beforehand.
Speaker 1: We did talk about how possibly he knew them from
Speaker 1: going to this restaurant. However, Kaylee Gone called us. His parents,
Speaker 1: Steven Christie, believe they have proof of a connection, and
Speaker 1: the minutes after learning Coburger's name, Christy, the mom says,
Speaker 1: we went online and immediately started googling. They say they
Speaker 1: discovered digital evidence that showed a tie between Coburger and
Speaker 1: two of the victims. In an interview with forty eight hours,
Speaker 1: the Gone Calvis family provided screenshots of an Instagram account
Speaker 1: they believe belonged to Coburger. Those screenshots include what they
Speaker 1: say is Coburger's Instagram profile and a list of people
Speaker 1: he was following, including Matti Mogan and Kaylee Gonekalvez. Forty
Speaker 1: eight hours has not been able to confirm the authenticity
Speaker 1: of this Instagram account. However, Christy Gone Calvez, who is
Speaker 1: the mother, says when they attempted to cross reference the
Speaker 1: accounts of Kaylee, Mattie, Xana, and Ethan, it appeared that
Speaker 1: that this Coburger account had interacted with Mattie's Instagram. You
Speaker 1: would go to Mattie's Instagram account and look at her pictures,
Speaker 1: and he liked them. Christy said, so he was actively
Speaker 1: looking at the Instagram account. That's something else that I
Speaker 1: think is interesting that'll come more up a trial was
Speaker 1: whether this was his Instagram account, if they can link
Speaker 1: it to him in some way to authenticate it, and
Speaker 1: if so, then he clearly had some kind of obsession.
Speaker 1: I would say, yeah, that he found her online. He's
Speaker 1: met her at the restaurant, she was cute and blonde.
Speaker 1: He finds her Instagram, He's liking her photos, he's sending
Speaker 1: her a DM. He probably followed her home from work
Speaker 1: one day he found out where.
Speaker 2: She lived, Not like he went out on three dates
Speaker 2: and she dumped him and said I want to see
Speaker 2: you and then he got obsessed.
Speaker 3: And killed her.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's like he never even like interactive with he
Speaker 2: never went on a date with her, and he wants
Speaker 2: to kill her.
Speaker 3: Like you're obsessed where you just want to follow him
Speaker 3: and then kill him. Yeah, weird. I mean it's it's
Speaker 3: evil either way, but it's just weird.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean he's a serial killer, so I know
Speaker 1: he's killer. He's not a serial killer. He killed four people,
Speaker 1: not a serial killing.
Speaker 3: A serial kill you have to keep repeating the crime
Speaker 3: over and over. So you're saying because he killed four people,
Speaker 3: well then every burglar would be a serial burglar because
Speaker 3: they took more one thing in the house.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I never thought of it that way.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'll start thinking like idea and you'll get a
Speaker 3: lot fast.
Speaker 1: Well, you know what, he might have killed again, though,
Speaker 1: but he messed up so many times. Sad he was caught,
Speaker 1: and maybe he went into criminology because he's obsessed with
Speaker 1: crimes and he wanted to commit the perfect crime.
Speaker 3: Maybe maybe and so and then he saw her.
Speaker 2: I mean, I guess people do go into their career
Speaker 2: like to pursue their career to perfect.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Like if I'm going to go to culinary art school,
Speaker 3: it's because I want to like bake the best pie. Right, yeah,
Speaker 3: so maybe he did.
Speaker 1: I can't him a picture you baking a pie. I
Speaker 1: would pay money to watch you bake a pie.
Speaker 3: I can picture you eating a pie.
Speaker 1: Okay, thank you for that.
Speaker 3: Pie? You know you like him?
Speaker 1: I love pie? Yeah, key pie is my favorite. All right.
Speaker 1: The parents that we were talking about this is Kaylee's
Speaker 1: parents say the account that they found, this Instagram account
Speaker 1: of Brian Coburger is no longer active. It disappeared shortly
Speaker 1: after his arrest. What did he do? Like, how do
Speaker 1: you do you have access after you're arrested, you have
Speaker 1: access to get on Instagram and deactivate your account.
Speaker 3: He might deactivated it before. I don't know. Like as
Speaker 3: he got arrested, well he got a ret you have
Speaker 3: one phone call.
Speaker 1: It's like he can't call Instagram.
Speaker 3: He just logged on his Instagram. Yeah, d x J
Speaker 3: whit out.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about some of the defense. What's the
Speaker 1: defense going to say? First of all, without even going
Speaker 1: through this rundown, I'll tell you the defense is going
Speaker 1: to use reasonable doubt.
Speaker 3: Because the defense us reasonable doubt. I know that. Sorry, no,
Speaker 3: but I was.
Speaker 1: You didn't let me explain. Of course, they're going to
Speaker 1: use reasonable doubt. But I'll tell you they're going to
Speaker 1: use reasonable doubt because there was also blood found on
Speaker 1: a handrail that they did not test, And there was
Speaker 1: a glove with blood found outside of the house a
Speaker 1: couple of days after the murder and they did not test.
Speaker 3: Why were they not test that?
Speaker 1: I don't know. I am dumbfounded by.
Speaker 3: Oh, this little button on this knife cover, we're gonna test. Yeah,
Speaker 3: but the bloody knife, we don't need to look into that.
Speaker 1: Not a bloody knife blood.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the stairway or stairwell or whatever.
Speaker 1: Yes, I've read that these two other And also there
Speaker 1: was DNA found a Maddie's fingernails that come from that
Speaker 1: did not match coburger. So there was like her DNA
Speaker 1: and unknown DNA and then another unknown DNA something like that.
Speaker 1: There's like a three part mixture and that wasn't tested.
Speaker 1: I believe that wasn't. Well, no, it was because it
Speaker 1: was unknown. I don't know, but there's the bloody glove
Speaker 1: and then the blood in the hallway. They did not
Speaker 1: test and for some reason I did read in some
Speaker 1: of these affidatas that they said that it was ineligible
Speaker 1: to be tested in codes. And I couldn't figure out
Speaker 1: why it was ineligible. I don't know. If the sample
Speaker 1: was too small, or there was some contamination.
Speaker 2: I don't know, but I wonder if they didn't want
Speaker 2: to test it maybe, or maybe they tested it and
Speaker 2: didn't come up as the same, so they just.
Speaker 1: So you're saying they just said it wasn't tested.
Speaker 3: I don't know. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I thought maybe, and I don't know.
Speaker 3: This is just me.
Speaker 1: This is me speculating that maybe they didn't want to
Speaker 1: test it, because then if it comes up to someone else,
Speaker 1: then they have to investigate that person. It takes away
Speaker 1: from Coburger, then it's too convoluted and they have.
Speaker 2: The defense will probably come up with the you you
Speaker 2: didn't look into anything else, You had thousands of blinders,
Speaker 2: only looked at my guy because you had one little
Speaker 2: thing on him, and then that then you directed all
Speaker 2: the evidence towards him, and.
Speaker 1: We know that happens. We know that happens in a
Speaker 1: lot of cases where you find a suspect and then
Speaker 1: they the police does a hardcore go after that suspect
Speaker 1: to the exclusion of anyone else that could possibly be involved.
Speaker 2: Defense is going to be like, once you don't look
Speaker 2: at the DNA evidence on the knife cover, and once
Speaker 2: you overlook the my client gazing at the stars twelve times,
Speaker 2: and once you overlook the DMS, and once you overlook
Speaker 2: the fact that he bought a knife eight months prior
Speaker 2: and kept searching after the crime, and he bought this
Speaker 2: scheme mass at Dicks.
Speaker 3: Once you overlook that, you will see that my client
Speaker 3: is innocent. And I urge you to look at the
Speaker 3: facts that make my clients all right.
Speaker 1: In other news, in this case, which I was interesting,
Speaker 1: they actually did demolish the house. And I told you
Speaker 1: this the other day and you said that that's pretty normal, when.
Speaker 3: Well, I don't know it's normal. I think that's probably
Speaker 3: not far fetched.
Speaker 2: Yeah, when there's like a mass murder, I mean, hang
Speaker 2: going to rent that out to their college dents.
Speaker 1: Well, I think there's sickos that would like to.
Speaker 3: Rent it there would be, and then you'd have to
Speaker 3: disclose it right when you sell it.
Speaker 1: Well, I think also maybe they had to demolish it
Speaker 1: because all these crime scene junkies there. People probably be
Speaker 1: driving by it all the time, like you, I would love. Yeah,
Speaker 1: now I went to the Meninda's house, I would drive
Speaker 1: by out take a road trip.
Speaker 3: That's probably another way. So it's really just a clean slate.
Speaker 1: Yeah. The off campus house was demolished on December twenty eight,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three, despite mixed feelings from the victims' families.
Speaker 1: University officials said they decided to tear down the house
Speaker 1: during winter break to try to decrease further impact on
Speaker 1: the students.
Speaker 3: Who live in that area the school owned it.
Speaker 1: Kaylee Gone Calves's family was firmly against knocking down the house,
Speaker 1: saying doing so would destroy one of the most crucial
Speaker 1: pieces of evidence in the case. For a trial date
Speaker 1: was even set.
Speaker 3: Oh well, I was just assuming they collected all the
Speaker 3: evidence and they got the green light.
Speaker 1: Well they did, because I did read that both sides,
Speaker 1: prosecution and defense, both agreed that they could tear the
Speaker 1: house down because they felt as if they had everything
Speaker 1: they needed. I do understand the families thinking that I
Speaker 1: don't know, maybe there's something more than someone. Well, I guessed,
Speaker 1: and now they can never recover it.
Speaker 2: It's better to I guess if I was the parent
Speaker 2: the victim, I'd be like, we, I'd rather preserve it
Speaker 2: just in case, you never know, right, I guess.
Speaker 1: Now they don't have that option exactly. So the two
Speaker 1: surviving roommates is Bethany Funk and Dylan Mortenson, have largely
Speaker 1: remained silent since the killings. That's because there was a
Speaker 1: gag order on this case. They're not allowed to well.
Speaker 3: Yeah, what are they gonna do? Go on podcasts in time?
Speaker 1: No, they well, they clearly can't talk about it. They
Speaker 1: also had to move this case. They moved the venue,
Speaker 1: they moved it out of whatever this area is. It's
Speaker 1: going to be in Boise, which is I'm not sure
Speaker 1: exactly how far away. But I read that it doesn't
Speaker 1: really even make that much of a difference, because I
Speaker 1: think they did a poll as to how many people
Speaker 1: have heard about the case and knew about it.
Speaker 3: Everyone know about especially in Idaho.
Speaker 1: It wasn't I'm moving in to Boise didn't make that
Speaker 1: big of a difference. So jury selection is going to
Speaker 1: be challenging as well, because I don't know how you're
Speaker 1: going to find a jury that hasn't already had some
Speaker 1: kind of preconceived notion that Brian, especially with.
Speaker 2: Us doing this podcast, everyone in Idaho listens to us,
Speaker 2: they do, and now they're gonna they're.
Speaker 1: Going to know what we know and what we think
Speaker 1: we know.
Speaker 3: Right, we've clearly cracked the case.
Speaker 1: We've cracked the case. We don't care about the other
Speaker 1: DNA out there was Dan. Yes, it's he's a vegan.
Speaker 1: He has bushy eyebrows. His name is Burger, Yes, and
Speaker 1: he drives around at night twelve stars at the stars
Speaker 1: on a dead end stream.
Speaker 2: I'm a criminal. I'm a criminology major with a uh
Speaker 2: A minor in astrology.
Speaker 3: Exactly, I guess. So.
Speaker 1: The two girls wrote letters to their lost friends, which
Speaker 1: were read aloud by a passer During a December twenty
Speaker 1: second service for Kernodle. The two girls got matching tattoos
Speaker 1: to memorialize their four friends, with initials of the victims'
Speaker 1: names on their arms along with angel wings. Many people
Speaker 1: blame Mortensen for waiting to call nine one one until
Speaker 1: the next day, since she saw coburger in the house.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know if it would have made
Speaker 1: any difference. I don't think any of them like we're
Speaker 1: alive for long, do you know what I mean? Like
Speaker 1: if she called nine to one one when she saw
Speaker 1: someone in the house, would that have made a difference
Speaker 1: what they have and they have survived.
Speaker 3: I think probably, possibly not.
Speaker 2: But I think it goes back to earlier in our conversation,
Speaker 2: which is that's probably normal response to call the police
Speaker 2: right away, Yeah, instead of checking your LinkedIn account.
Speaker 1: I mean, it is a normal response. But then again,
Speaker 1: I've never been in that situation, so I'm trying not
Speaker 1: to judge, but I just I can't get past not
Speaker 1: being able to get a hold of your roommates, hearing
Speaker 1: weird noises and seeing a masked man in your house,
Speaker 1: and you don't call nine to one one until the
Speaker 1: next day when a friend comes over. And I think
Speaker 1: the friend came over and actually went to check on
Speaker 1: the roommates and found them dead, and that's why they
Speaker 1: finally called nine to one one. I'm confused. That's why
Speaker 1: I'm looking forward to the trial, because I feel like
Speaker 1: a lot of good, a better gape, there'll be a
Speaker 1: better timeline and better details, and they're clearly going to testify,
Speaker 1: and they're going to talk about what they talked about
Speaker 1: with their parents and what they were doing on social
Speaker 1: media and what their mind was during that time period.
Speaker 1: So to me, that's really interesting. Many some even suspect
Speaker 1: that Mortenson and Funk, that's Bethany and Dylan were involved
Speaker 1: in the murder. That's a lot of people online, you know,
Speaker 1: those online slus like to to learn all this stuff
Speaker 1: and then speculate that maybe the roommates were involved and
Speaker 1: that's why they didn't call nine one one. I personally,
Speaker 1: from reading everything that I've read and going through everything,
Speaker 1: I don't think that's the case. I think they just
Speaker 1: made bad decisions, and I think maybe they were overly intoxicated,
Speaker 1: and maybe that I don't thinkge maybe she questioned what
Speaker 1: she saw and thought I'll sound stupid if I'm.
Speaker 2: Wrong or something. I don't think it sounds I don't
Speaker 2: think it changed. Just really any of the necessary facts
Speaker 2: to determine whether he was guilty or not.
Speaker 1: Right, Well, do you have any other questions, because we
Speaker 1: have come to the end of the Brian Coburger case
Speaker 1: and the Idaho murders. Again, I'm very interested in the
Speaker 1: trial and hopefully we'll follow along.
Speaker 3: Well, I have a question. Is he in custody? Yes? Okay,
Speaker 3: no bail?
Speaker 1: No, I don't think so. So anyway, the trial will
Speaker 1: be interesting, a lot more details will come out, obviously,
Speaker 1: the roommates will testify, the family members I know family
Speaker 1: members are expected to testify as well, even Brian's family members.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, because to explain the Amazon account, right, because
Speaker 2: did you purchase a knife?
Speaker 3: Okay, did you purchase a knife?
Speaker 1: Okay?
Speaker 3: Again, it leaves him. It's the only one that purchases right.
Speaker 1: All right. Thanks for listening to legally Brunette. We appreciate it.
Speaker 1: And if you haven't listened to all our episodes, you
Speaker 1: can go back and listen to them. And thanks again.
Speaker 1: We appreciate it.
Speaker 3: Thank you,