On a recent episode of "Hidden Killers," a popular podcast exploring intricate legal and criminal issues, Deborah Aherns, a former public defender and professor of law at Seattle U School of Law, discussed the controversial trial of Bryan Kohberger. Kohberger's case has gripped public attention due to bold assertions of planted DNA and intricate alibi strategies.
The defendant, Kohberger, implicated in a grave crime, is attempting to establish an alibi by cross-examining witnesses presented by the state. Aherns describes this approach as "trying to undermine the State's case by asking the jurors if they are really confident beyond a reasonable doubt that Kohberger is the guilty party."
Despite the compelling evidence against Kohberger, which includes phone records and GPS triangulation suggestive of his presence at the scene of the crime, his defense team is attempting to exploit the circumstantial nature of this evidence. The prosecution's case is built on cell site location information and video evidence of Kohberger's car at various locations. However, the defense is countering by questioning the infallibility of these types of evidence.
Aherns detailed, "The direct evidence that you have is the DNA. The circumstantial evidence is the cell site location information that places him leaving, returning, and disconnects his phone during the time the events would have taken place." Kohberger's defense argues that the evidence does not definitively place him at the crime scene, as cell phone disconnection could be accidental, and his travels could be coincidental.
Aherns further delved into the complexities of the case, suggesting that the defense might not be as focused on proving Kohberger's innocence as it is on cultivating sufficient doubt to spare his life. Given the severity of the charges, it appears the defense aims to sway the jury from leaning toward the death penalty.
Additionally, Aherns alluded to potential negotiation tactics, with the defense possibly using pretrial processes as a lengthy negotiation stage, trying to convince the state to remove the death penalty from the table in exchange for a guilty plea. This tactic, according to Aherns, is often used in cases involving the death penalty due to the high costs and burdens on communities associated with such cases.
When asked about the trial's progression, Aherns acknowledged the likelihood of delays, citing the onerous nature of jury selection in death penalty cases, and the need for both prosecution and defense to be fully prepared. Therefore, she wouldn't be surprised if the trial, assuming it happens, starts at a later date than the current October 2nd schedule.
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at
https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com