ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 70

[Zella]

It seems our judicial system is speculating that this will be a capital case. They have even, evidentially, put so much weight on this speculation that it has restricted the pool of public defenders from which they can draw.
Why then, isn't the same weight given to the speculation of conflict of interest?

As though it's good and wise to speculate on one issue but irrelevant on the other?

Probably because it's in a state of limbo, so it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to choose an attorney without that qualification? The prosecutors have a 60-day deadline after he enters a plea to request the death penalty, and he still has not entered a plea. He may not enter one until the summer, and they have another 2 months after that to make up their minds. That's pushing a decision into late summer or even the fall, potentially.

It makes a lot more sense to get a death penalty-qualified penalty for him now and not need that person than to have picked another attorney who'd have to be replaced as soon as the prosecutors decide to seek that.

He faces multiple charges and multiple aggravating factors with those charges that could lead to the death penalty. It seems far more likely they will seek the death penalty than not, IMO. MOO

Bryan Kohberger could face the death penalty in Idaho student murders

In the first court appearance for the man accused of brutally killing four University of Idaho students, a judge laid out all five counts he is facing. Even if he was found guilty of just one of the four counts of murder, he could be sentenced to death or life in prison without the possibility...

www.q13fox.com

Idaho prosecutors will seek death penalty in Kohberger trial, says judge

Prosecutors are likely to seek the death penalty for Bryan Kohberger, who is accused of murdering four Idaho University students, according to Belvin Perry.

www.newsweek.com

 

[SMK777]

Bryan Kohberger Public Defender Represented Father and Stepmother of Murder Victim Madison Mogen

Court records obtained by Inside Edition Digital list Anne Taylor as a member of the defense team on closed criminal cases involving Benjamin Mogen and his wife, Korie Hatrock.

www.insideedition.com

 

[Cassady]

That would only be if the PD's office had acquired information protected by privilege/ or is confidential that is material to this matter. If there is a legitimate, fact-based argument that Xana's mom associates had anything to do with this case then perhaps. But there's nothing that indicates as such. Anyway, I get it it's complicated, but I think there's a lot of hand wringing about speculative conflicts that are irrelevant.

IMO a defense attorney has to actively investigate the case for the client and present a vigorous defense. If one or more of the victims parents were involved in drugs, then that may be the best angle of defense available. The current attorney for the defedant has apparently handled various drug cases involving the previous client/victim's parent. IMO with the facts we know it would be malpractice not to extentsively investigate and probably argue this "drug" angle at trial.

IMO serious drug traffickers can and will resort to violence, including against family members of people who cross them. IMO certain street gangs favor using large knives in their crimes. With what we know, this seems like the most obvious defense theory, if they are trying to draw the focus away from their client..which is part of their job and ethical duty...IMO.

The problem is that for the defendant's current attorney it means investigating and possibly going after at trial, a former client for the things that you previously represented them for...IMO.

 

[Cassady]

More simply put:

If the previous representation of the victim's parents was for DUI, for example, the potential for a COI is far less or even non-existent. The "drug" angle is what creates the potential COI...IMO

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Probably because it's in a state of limbo, so it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to choose an attorney without that qualification? The prosecutors have a 60-day deadline after he enters a plea to request the death penalty, and he still has not entered a plea. He may not enter one until the summer, and they have another 2 months after that to make up their minds. That's pushing a decision into late summer or even the fall, potentially.

It makes a lot more sense to get a death penalty-qualified penalty for him now and not need that person than to have picked another attorney who'd have to be replaced as soon as the prosecutors decide to seek that.

He faces multiple charges and multiple aggravating factors with those charges that could lead to the death penalty. It seems far more likely they will seek the death penalty than not, IMO. MOO

Bryan Kohberger could face the death penalty in Idaho student murders

In the first court appearance for the man accused of brutally killing four University of Idaho students, a judge laid out all five counts he is facing. Even if he was found guilty of just one of the four counts of murder, he could be sentenced to death or life in prison without the possibility...

www.q13fox.com

Idaho prosecutors will seek death penalty in Kohberger trial, says judge

Prosecutors are likely to seek the death penalty for Bryan Kohberger, who is accused of murdering four Idaho University students, according to Belvin Perry.

www.newsweek.com

Thank you, Zella. I do understand and am not contesting the logic used in weighing the speculation that a death qualified attorney should be assigned. I agree with it. But what I don't understand is why it is not just as logical to speculate on whether or not the attorney has a conflict of interest that could also complicate/delay the case.

 

[gliving]

Thus, the term "potential" COI. However that potential becomes very real as soon as the defendant starts requesting that the previous client's involvement with drugs be investigated. The previous client's involvement with drugs is exactly what the previous representation involved and there is perhaps information gained in confidence that could be helpful to the current client. That is a real mess any way you slice it...IMO

In Ms Taylor's request for discovery, she requests drug test results. Would this be specifically for BK or is it for any/all drug tests? tia

16. Drug tests. Provide a copy of all documentation generated as a result of performed drug tests by the State’s agent for drug identification purposes, including types of testing performed in this case, testing procedures, reagents and/or solvents used in testing, comparative analyses performed, and number of experiments performed in each test.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/011023%20Request%20for%20Discovery.pdf

 

[Helechawagirl]

Oh you might be right. But still, it just looks horrible. I understand the need for a DP qualified attorney, but geez. There has to be a better way. It’s just icky. JMO

From a PR perspective, it’s a lost cause; if they had a reasonable explanation, they should have said so immediately. The silence has given people time to make up their minds. They’ve lost public trust. They either have to remove AT from the case, or convince the public that this is not a COI because it sure looks one to most of us. JMO

 

[Zella]

Thank you, Zella. I do understand and am not contesting the logic used in weighing the speculation that a death qualified attorney should be assigned. I agree with it. But what I don't understand is why it is not just as logical to speculate on whether or not the attorney has a conflict of interest that could also complicate/delay the case.

It's not illogical to ask, but I think when you have such a limited pool to choose from, then one issue does take precedence over the other.

As I've stated on here before, I live in an area even more rural than where this case happened. We have a small enough pool of attorneys that I can easily imagine this issue happening here for a similar case.

I agree if the defense chooses a certain line, then there will likely be a conflict of interest. But I don't think there's an inherent conflict of interest just because the attorney represented victim family members in the past.

Is it a weird coincidence? Yes. It is unfortunate? Yes. Could it potentially require the attorney to remove herself from the case? Possibly. It is automatically unethical? I don't think so.

I think what troubles me the most is people acting as if the PD is some sort of ruthless shark who's unceremoniously dumped her former clients to take this case--I'm not saying you've said that, but that has been an attitude expressed repeatedly on this board. She was appointed to this case, just as she was appointed to the other cases, and it troubles me that she's being demonized for a decision that she did not initiate and, based on the logistics of the case, is likely unavoidable by both her and the court. MOO

 

[Luna20]

<modsnip> Banfield <modsnip> part 2 with CN is on at 9cst.

 

[BelleIsle]

If we know the King Street house was a party house where drugs were often distributed (if only by partygoers) wouldn't the police and PD investigators have known this from the beginning? Surely both agencies know of the Mogen and Kernodle drug cases, past and present. Wouldn't Wouldn't they and the King Street survivors have been asked about the possibility that a conflict over drugs was the motive for the slaughter? Quite independent of confidential communications with the PD?

Since we're speculating on hypotheticals, I'll suggest that investigators for both agencies have been looking at this from the beginning, and have independently concluded it's a dead end.

I am sure this is part of the investigation. If it has been on our minds, here, then I think it is also being spoken about elsewhere. <modsnip> This whole case bums me out.

 

[Helechawagirl]

It's not illogical to ask, but I think when you have such a limited pool to choose from, then one issue does take precedence over the other.

As I've stated on here before, I live in an area even more rural than where this case happened. We have a small enough pool of attorneys that I can easily imagine this issue happening here for a similar case.

I agree if the defense chooses a certain line, then there will likely be a conflict of interest. But I don't think there's an inherent conflict of interest just because the attorney represented victim family members in the past.

Is it a weird coincidence? Yes. It is unfortunate? Yes. Could it potentially require the attorney to remove herself from the case? Possibly. It is automatically unethical? I don't think so.

I think what troubles me the most is people acting as if the PD is some sort of ruthless shark who's unceremoniously dumped her former clients to take this case--I'm not saying you've said that, but that has been an attitude expressed repeatedly on this board. She was appointed to this case, just as she was appointed to the other cases, and it troubles me that she's being demonized for a decision that she did not initiate and, based on the logistics of the case, is likely unavoidable by both her and the court. MOO

But doesn’t she make the appointments as part of her position?

 

[Zella]

But doesn’t she make the appointments as part of her position?

Even if she does, that doesn't mean she had another death penalty-qualified public defender available whom she could delegate the case to. MOO

 

[kittythehare]

Harkening back to the days after the four murders of Ethan, Kaylee, Madison, and Xana, and the statements made by LE in MSM about the crime scene, I can't let myself lose sight of the pain and suffering of the victims' loved ones and the trauma they are experiencing due to not only losing them all so suddenly and unexpectedly, of course, but learning about the absolutely horrific brutality of the "fixed blade" attacks that killed them. Which, IMO, is why the FBI was called in by Moscow PD right away because of the heinous nature (brutal stabbings), scope (4 people), and setting (private residence in the middle of the night) that is "beyond unusual", IMO.

What has kept me on edge from the beginning about these murders is this underlying feeling of dread about the way in which they were committed. IMO, it's almost as if the killer had a goal they set for themselves to up the ante with a superlative/superceding type of vicious killing spree that "had never been seen before" in that community that they either figured would prove daunting for Moscow PD, or they did to gather some sort of experimental evidence on LE's response to extreme conditions like in some sort of clinical or laboratory setting.

The way in which the victims were killed still unnerves me to no end, regardless of the specifics that have been revealed in the affidavits regarding search warrants and BK's arrest, and the attendant drama surrounding this very tragic, complex, and high profile case. Standing strong through all the public hoopla with the loved ones of the four victims and eagerly awaiting justice for them all! JMOO

Cops shocked by scene of University of Idaho slayings: ‘Blood everywhere’​

NYPost
Yaron Steinbuch
November 16, 2022

"Authorities said Tuesday that the bloody scene where four University of Idaho students were slaughtered with a knife was the “worst they’ve ever seen” – as people on campus unnerved by the shocking crime skip town early for Thanksgiving.

Law enforcement sources told the Daily Mail that the victims bled out after being butchered in the off-campus home, and described the scene as the “worst they’ve ever seen.”

“There was blood everywhere. We have investigators who have been on the job for 20, even 30, years, and they say they have never seen anything like this,” a police source close to the probe told the outlet."

Cops shocked by scene of University of Idaho slayings: ‘Blood everywhere’

The apparent randomness makes it even more scary.
The knowing that this could happen again anywhere anytime from the most unlikely perpetrator...possibly with impunity..
Nothing could have prepared the young victims.
Nothing can prepare any of us.
That is the reality.
Crazy world.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

The problem for the defendant's attorney arises when the defendant wants to explore alternate theories and ask his attorney to start investigating the parent(s) of one of the victims and their involvement with drugs. The defendant may want to look at whether some drug dealers had motive to hurt the family of someone who stole/snitched/etc against said drug dealer.

Is his current attorney in a position to tell her investigators to go investigate her former clients? Does the attorney have to withhold information from the client or their investigator because she obtained that information through her former representation of the person her client wants investigated? To do so she would have to get the previous client's waiver to divulge that information to the new client. IMO....not sure the victim's parents would waive attorney confidences so the attorney could vigorously represent the person accused of killing their child.

Now perhaps the defendant's attorney has not thought about this potential angle, but as soon as the defendant hears that any of the victim's family was involved with drugs in anyway, they have a right to ask their attorney to investigate this for their case. If an attorney's previous representations hinder that in any way, there is a serious conflict issue that will stick to this case like gum on the bottom of a shoe...IMO.

Yikes. Nightmare scenario.

 

[TIGER0822]

That would only be if the PD's office had acquired information protected by privilege/ or is confidential that is material to this matter. If there is a legitimate, fact-based argument that Xana's mom associates had anything to do with this case then perhaps. But there's nothing that indicates as such. Anyway, I get it it's complicated, but I think there's a lot of hand wringing about speculative conflicts that are irrelevant.

The appearance of a conflict of interest in my opinion could possibly jeopardize the case.

 

[TIGER0822]

The real conflict here is giving a suspect ANY opportunity to appeal. To me that is common sense, why even go there. Suspects look for every reason to appeal.

AT dropping CN and taking the BK case isn’t warm and fuzzy but that’s not the imminent concern, an appeal is.

It would be an interesting case, to appeal a case based on your own attorneys knowing conflict of interest prior to the case.

 

[steeltowngirl]

IMO, it's almost as if the killer had a goal they set for themselves to up the ante with a superlative/superceding type of vicious killing spree that "had never been seen before" in that community that they either figured would prove daunting for Moscow PD, or they did to gather some sort of experimental evidence on LE's response to extreme conditions like in some sort of clinical or laboratory setting.

^rsbm
Great post.

‘Up the ante’ reminded me that BTK / Dennis Rader told TMZ that he himself sees similarities between the killer‘s method and his own dark mind. Crazy as he is, it takes one to know one.

Scared the bejesus out of me reading that he said that.

BTK Says Bryan Kohberger Shares His Serial Killer Attributes

The BTK serial killer says Bryan Kohberger shares some of his traits, and that one of his own attacks -- a quadruple homicide -- is eerily similar to the Idaho student slayings.

www.tmz.com

 

[Boxer]

Based on the facts we know, I think it's unlikely there exists an actual conflict that would require recusal. Curious if any legal ethics professionals have a different view (I am a lawyer, but that is not my field).

Idaho Rule of Professional Conduct 1.7(a) provides that “a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest.” Idaho Rule Prof’l Conduct 1.7(a). A concurrent conflict of interest exists if “there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client.” Idaho Rule Prof’l Conduct 21.7(a)(2 Comment 8 explains that “[t]he mere possibility of subsequent harm does not itself require disclosure and consent.” Idaho Rule Prof’l Conduct 1.7 cmt. 8.

The possible conflicts cited here are quite speculative.

MOO don’t think anything is going to save AT being on the case.

Its too important not to have complete professionalism.

 

[TIGER0822]

Yes, I haven't seen any indication that there is a conflict of interest. I doubt Xana's mom has given the attorney confidential information about the case. Anything she knows she's probably learned from the media. Having a daughter in the same school as the defendant doesn't mean there is a connection between BK and the victims. Imo

There is an appearance of a. conflict of interest, that’s enough.

 

[Nova]

Thus, the term "potential" COI. However that potential becomes very real as soon as the defendant starts requesting that the previous client's involvement with drugs be investigated. The previous client's involvement with drugs is exactly what the previous representation involved and there is perhaps information gained in confidence that could be helpful to the current client. That is a real mess any way you slice it...IMO

Thank you for explaining these things in language we laypeople can understand!

Just for my own edification and speaking entirely hypothetically: what if AT were NOT BK's counsel, but knew of something exculpatory to him because of her representation of Xana's mother? (Or, conversely, what if AT learned something in her representation of BK that exculpated the mother?)

Would she have an obligation to reveal the exculpatory info? Even if doing so would violate attorney/client privilege? (I assume not in the latter case.)

Or does the requirement of sharing exculpatory info only apply to the DA?