May 20, 2025 • 35 mins
Joseph Scott Morgan and Dave Mack discuss the leaks in the Bryan Kohberger case and what new information is now in the public. The Dateline show with information not released by the public has the judge in the case investigating the leak. Joseph Scott Morgan also looks at the ghastly injuries done to Ethan Chapin that were allegedly done while he was asleep
Transcript Highlights
00:00.03 Introduction
01:15.89 Joseph Scott Morgan is being viewed by Kohberger
06:46.56 Is there any way to get death penalty off the table
10:13.55 Realizing a killer has been listening
15:44.22 Dateline sharing leaked info
20:13.79 Investigators don't always get it right
25:11.68 Sinister pictures, don't look at his eyes
30:02.54 Timeline in Idaho is a 20 minute window
35:05.07 What else haven't we seen?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Quandy times, but Joseph Scott more so. This past Saturday,
I was mentioned in a post on X and you know,
I look down, my handle is on there and everything
and saying it's just gonna be some comment about, you know,
(00:25):
some case that's floating around there. Well, yeah, it was
about a case. And not only was it about a case,
it was about a very specific case. Because this was
on Saturday, and on Friday night apparently Dateline did an
episode on the Idaho four and of course the accused
(00:49):
is Brian Coberger. Boy, do I have a tale to
tell you, guys, because apparently apparently I have been viewed
by certain individuals that I'm prepared to discuss right now.
I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is body Backs. Dave
(01:16):
kidnap me over with a feather. I'm sitting there with
my Queen of the Homestead and we're having our morning
coffee as we do every day, my favorite time of day,
by the way, and I'm scrolling through the night's events,
(01:36):
catching up on X formerly known of course as Twitter,
and lo and behold, I've been tagged, and there before me,
I see a picture that is a screen grab off
of Dateline and it's my image. Apparently Ryan Coburger. According
(01:56):
to them at Dateline, they have information that states that
he's watching or listening to things on YouTube relative to
true crime and specifically these four homicides in which he
(02:17):
is accused of perpetrating. David got to tell you, brother,
not too many things send a chill up and spine.
It got my attention real quick when the Idaho case
kicked off. When we first had a national awareness of it,
my wife and I were just as shocked. It was
(02:39):
on a Sunday and it hit the news that afternoon.
The next day that Monday, I was on national television
and it seemed like, for oh my lord, it was
like solid for like three weeks. I just had phone
calls coming in from all of these different networks, podcast,
(03:00):
YouTube channels, and all this sort of thing. So the
fact that I would pop up on his radar, I
guess because he's seeking I think if you continue with
this line of logic here, that Dateline is putting forward.
This isn't me putting this forward, is date Line. I
(03:20):
would think that he's seeking information from individuals that may
have practiced in the past, because if you're you know,
if you're in kind of the atmosphere that I'm in
right now. I don't work in the field anymore. I'm
a teacher and then I do commentary. So I bring
my knowledge from, you know, as a practitioner and as
(03:43):
an educator to most of the stuff that I do,
and I just talk about it. And look, I'm not
the only one. I'm sure that there were multiple, multiple
locations that he visited along the way and just a
glean information. And I find that's very interesting what you mentioned, Dave.
(04:03):
People throw around that term narcissism quite a bit, and
it seems like it's in every other sentence now then
everybody's making a diagnosis of narcissism. I don't know if
that's the same as being egocentric or I guess there's
shades of this involved in everything. But I'm interested in
(04:26):
what you have to say about. Was he seeking information
about the case potentially or was he scratching that edge
to see his name or see not his name. We
wouldn't have known it at that time, but to see
the shock that it elicits from the general public. You know,
(04:48):
every time there's some breathless reporter that comes on the air,
to talk about some little new thing that has developed.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
I wonder why John, Yeah, why he But not I
kind of I'm more like, I wonder why he's listening
or watching that particular show. But I really I think
it's feeding his ego, you know, getting his name mentioned.
But I think it's also you got to remember he's
also a student, so almost a professional student in his life.
(05:20):
You know, he didn't really go out of the educational atmosphere.
But I think based on what we know of him,
and it makes sense that he would be driven to
watch or listen to a professor give a breakdown as
opposed to a clinician. It just makes sense to me
(05:41):
that he would be that he. I don't want to
say that he's a you know, he's drawn to you,
but it makes sense to me that he would care
what your opinion was because as a student, he wants
to impress the professor, and as a suspected killer, you know,
he wants as much fame. He's not gonna get away
with it. At this point that they've pretty much made
(06:02):
sure that the judge has made sure that everything that
they didn't want in is coming in. And so at
this point I think they're trying to mitigate the death penalty.
You know, is there a way that we can avoid that?
Speaker 1 (06:13):
Yeah, I mean Exhibit one A is autism, right, yeah,
because autism has nothing to do with him his appearance
in court.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
You mentioned.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
I love that word mitigate. By the way, they're trying
to mitigate the death penalty here, they're trying to say
that he's he's not eligible because he's diagnosed with autism,
which you know is.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
You're mentally handicapped. Because of that, then how did you
get to be in to be in a college level
a program you know, that just doesn't hold wall. That
is just a bucket full of holes man?
Speaker 3 (06:49):
Really?
Speaker 1 (06:49):
Yeah? And that based on listen listen. People that would
that would make a different argument will say, well, you
don't understand the spectrum is nuanced. I I mean, how
many times have we heard that? And look, that's gonna
be The people that say that are making the same
argument that the defense is making.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
You and I have had this conversation about the on
the spectrum with regard to my grandson.
Speaker 1 (07:15):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
As soon as that started coming out on this, I went, really,
you're going to play this card. Let's see how far
they go, and having seen it up close and personal,
I wasn't shocked that they tried to play it. I'm
thankful that nobody bought it. Well, I'm not shocked the
game looking for you.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
I want to interject one more thing and about this
as well. People throw around this term in cell. Oh yeah,
so you know they'll say, uh, you know, I'll just
see random comments that will pop up on social media
and they'll say classic insul And I'm thinking, Okay, how
(07:58):
did that? How'd you arrive at that dog noo is?
Because I can tell you this. There is a manual
that mental health workers use. It's called the DSM, and
it's in multiple iterations, and I think they're in like
the third third. I'm sorry, excuse me, they're in the
fifth iteration of this now nowhere in that manual or
(08:18):
you can go in there and find the term in cell.
And the way this manual, the DSM works is that, yeah,
it helps you make diagnoses, but you know what else
they do. There's a code in there so that when
mental health people are making a diagnosis, they have to
enter that code onto their insurance forms in order to
get reimbursed. So if there was money to be made
(08:42):
with a diagnosis of being an in cell And I
don't even know what you would call it, in cell titis,
in cell itis. I have no idea that that implies
an infection. There's no such thing in the mental health
world as being an in cell. This is a uh,
a term that has been created to categorize a certain
(09:04):
group of men. And so they've used this term for him,
and you know, they just kind of throw these terms
around like that.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
If you don't know what in cel means, it means
involuntarily sulibate.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
It's for guys who have trouble with girls.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
And and to be honest with you, they would have
a problem with most guys, you know, based on the
way they talk, act and think. They're not the type
of individual I know anybody would hang out with.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
And so I think it's weird. I mean, most of
the time people are you know, you come across somebody
in there, you know, I don't know, eccentric maybe.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
But that's a great term.
Speaker 1 (09:52):
Yeah, yeah, eccentricity, you know, And uh, I have a
touch of that in me. I'm a college professor. I'm
it's actually mandated in my contract every year you must
be eccentric because you're a college professor, but you know,
back to this idea of him. Can I tell you
one other thing that happened to me on Saturday morning
(10:12):
as I sat there with my with my bride and
my cup of Joe's.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
Weird to hear you call it a cup of Joe.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
I know it is kind of weird, isn't it. I
sat there and as I'm sipping on my coffee and
I'm kind of absorbing this thing, the first thing that
jumped into my mind's eye was what did I say?
What did I say? Did I Did I say anything
(10:41):
that could have been taken by this individual and had
some kind of utility for them? And you can't think
that way. But that's not it's not outside. I mean,
we go to crime con and I actually have people
that will walk up to me. Happens almost every crime con.
They'll say, do you feel like that you're teaching killers
(11:05):
out there? Perspective killers? And no, I'm teaching forensics. I mean,
all are welcome at the table, I guess, but you know,
you can't tell who's out there in the audience when
you're making any kind of comment. You could say the
same thing I guess about the people that are on Dateline.
I mean, they do this, They've done this for years.
(11:25):
You know, they have that sloted time and there are
people that can't go without watching Dateline. Hey, that's cool
if that's what you're what you're all about. But you
know they're disseminating information as well. But you know, I
had that, I've had that thought. You know, that's come
up in my mind, you know, over the years, you know,
(11:45):
thinking about you know, who's within the sound of my voice.
And I look, if you think that's bad, I think
now about my academic colleagues that are at the Sales University.
And now all of these years later, after this massacre
(12:11):
in Moscow, Idaho took place, I really wonder are they thinking,
are they thinking, what do we teach you? Well, brother Dave,
(12:40):
Aside from my mug appearing on television and the shock
my own personal pearl clutching that took place over it,
they did. They did have information that they revealed and
a lot of stuff with stuff that we had not
heard before, you know, kind of this as it applies
(13:02):
to what was going on within the house. And you know,
my question, I think one of my big questions is
how'd they come into this information Dateline, that is, was
there a source within some department up there, you know?
And I don't know. I'm not going to even state
any department. I'm just going to say that there are
(13:24):
multiple departments that are involved in the investigation of these
four homicides. If the folks at Dateline, the producers felt
this strongly that they would produce this thing. And I
bet you dollars to know, Netes Brother, that this episode,
(13:45):
I bet they had some of the highest ratings they've
had in a while, just simply based on this, on
this particular episode, because there were a couple of really
big reveals in this day.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
And they built it up right.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
They did a good job promoting it, you know, And
there's a zeitgeis here with this particular killing, this murderer
of whatever.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
You know.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
To call a topic popular when you're dealing with the
deaths of four college students is mind numbing. It shows
you a lot about how we look at things. But
you know, every time now that we talk about the
Coburger story, the murders, I'm gonna be honest, Joe, I
have a twinge of hurt for you over what happened
in Orlando at crime Con when you were giving an
(14:28):
incredibly you did a loving tribute to the students, to
the victims. You talked with a lot of care about
what they went through and what happened, and you kind
of got at the very end, you know, I felt
like that you were not treated the way you should
have been treated.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
By somebody, and that bothered me.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
And so every time we cover this story, I think
about how, no matter hard you work to take care
of talking about the individuals, you and I are both victim,
the kids, and whenever we're not seen that way, it
bothers me.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
And yeah it does. And listen, it's like I said before,
you know, not turning down any kind of offer that's made,
even in those circumstances, which, by the way, I think
I've made mentioned this before. But it was in a
room of thirty four hundred people. Yeah, I don't think
that I've ever spoken to a crowd that large before.
(15:24):
I couldn't see the back of the room. You know,
first off, there's lights in your eyes. It was awesome,
but I could tell there were a lot of people,
and so I couldn't I couldn't see beyond it. But yeah,
and it was a learning experience and you never know,
you know, you never know what's going to bubble up
out of that. But when you think about what Dateline
(15:51):
has done in talking about this case, thirty four hundred people,
is nothing that happened that night or that afternoon, you know,
with me me, you think about the people that they reach,
and there's not going to be aybody standing up and
making some kind of comment in the crowd. This is
going to be about something else. You know, there might
(16:13):
be people at home screaming at the television screen for
all I know. I have no idea. But when you
get into like that kind of real granular detail about
what they are being told, and I have to think
that they're being told because they're not investigators. I think that,
(16:38):
you know, the most striking thing that came out of
this is that there was one part I believe where
they they allege that Xanna may have gone upstairs when
she heard a noise. Now I don't know how they
validate that. I don't know how they come up with that.
And then of course she is perhaps it's kind of
(17:01):
implied that maybe she was chased back downstairs by Coburger
he goes into the room attacks her. You know, she
had been up, she had received the order, that they
had done the food order. She was awake, And it
deviates from what we had heard about Ethan because now
they're saying that Ethan most likely was asleep in bed.
(17:25):
And we know what we have been what we have
heard previously about Xanna and her injuries where you've got
these sharp force injuries that literally go down to the
cartilage in her fingers where there's either blade grabbing going
on in a defensive posture or she's been stabbed in
the hand, and of course she's brutalized at that point.
(17:48):
And then you know, my lord, the information that Dayline
is saying, again not Morgan saying it. What they're talking
about relative to Ethan. You know, we've heard that Ethan.
I think there was one iteration where they said Ethan
was on the floor and uh, just adjacent to the
(18:09):
door and he'd had a really nasty injury to his neck.
That according to that doesn't square with what Dayline is saying,
because Dayline and correct me if I'm wrong. Dave Dayline
said that Ethan's leg or legs were carved up with
(18:31):
sharp force injury and that he was in the bed,
so that it completely changes the dynamic of what we
had known about this case to begin with. Am I
am I right? Isn't that what I said?
Speaker 2 (18:43):
And you know when I saw that, I thought, this
is new. This is not information that we have had
up to this point. As a matter of fact, a
lot of the stuff that we're being told now are
things we had didn't know or things that they don't
make sense to be honest with you. You know, we
were told at first that Dylan Mortenson, you know, the
(19:05):
the bushy the one who described the bushy eyebrows, that
Dylan you know, that she heard something and went back
and went to sleep and woke up around noon.
Speaker 1 (19:13):
You know.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
Now we find out that Dylan Mortenson was on the
phone all the time. So there's a lot of things.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Actually, And I think that information actually came out prior
to the Dateline special. It did, and that was like
week week or week before last.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
Yes, I think it was a slow trickle of things and.
Speaker 1 (19:35):
That has that has gone gone on.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
You know, Joe, I remember back to the Scott Peterson case,
and do you remember what happened between the first day
of the trial and the last day, other than all
the evidence, there was a really big reveal, a really
big change happened. And it's because that that whenever I
(20:01):
see a trickle of information coming out or something that
is really counter to what we believe up to this moment,
I realize that investigators don't have all the truth yet
they're still figuring it out. In the Peterson case, the
investigators the prosecutors open by saying they believe Lacy Peterson
(20:24):
was killed on December twenty third. Yeah, and by the
end of the trial it was proved that no, she
wasn't killed in she was killed on Christmas Eve.
Speaker 3 (20:36):
That's a pretty big difference.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
Yeah, And that's why when something like that can happen
in a major crime that had all the world's attention
and still does. Peterson still has huge ratings. The guy's
got the La Innocence Project. I mean, everybody's working on
this thing. And you know, I'll be honest with you, Joe,
if investigators had that part wrong, I got a feeling.
(21:01):
Look I think he did it, but go ahead and
look at it again. But in this case, how do
you go from saying the reason we didn't get a
nine one one call until noon. Is because the roommate
was asleep. After she sees a guy with bushy hair
is bolting out the door, she just goes and lays
down and crashes out. But then we find out she
was on the phone the whole time. It can't be both,
(21:23):
It has to be one of the other.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Yeah, this is not one of these things where two
things can be right at the same time. You know.
I hear that phrase come up a lot now in
our conversations all around, And so what do you think, Yeah,
I don't. I don't think that. I don't. I guess
that if you're stating not you. But they, if they
(21:45):
are stating that they have information now that indicates that
there was phone activity. Remember we got those text you know,
talking about run run to me expletive, you know, all
these sorts of things. And there was even one one
bit that came out recently. And I don't know how
they concluded this that Dylan actually saw Xana's body and
(22:11):
maybe thought she was sleeping. But I got to tell you,
I don't know what the degree of lighting was in
that environment. And I know she's not a trained professional,
at least I don't think she is. She in my estimation,
the area around her would have been super saturated with blood.
(22:32):
So how can you merely, when you're looking over your
shoulder just say, yes, she was sleeping, And why would
she be sleeping on the floor. I mean, what are
you thinking she passed out? She passed out drunk, because
that doesn't seem like something she would have done necessarily.
She staid with her boyfriend. And look, I know that
(22:52):
there's we don't know yet alcohol had been imbibed. I
mean they had come from a fraternity party, you know,
and every one of my fraternity parties, I can tell
you they were not teetotalers there neither was I was
chief among sinners. And so I got to tell you,
I think about this, and I think about the information
(23:14):
that has been provided along the way at about the
circumstances that night, maybe even leading up to that day's events,
and what happened afterwards. I'm still I still think, Dave,
that at this point in time, I still have more
(23:35):
questions than I do answers. Let's see adage, Dave, A
picture's wors what one thousand words is that? What they
(23:56):
say is that I get confused sometimes.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Your paints a thousand words.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
Come on, this is David Gates.
Speaker 3 (24:04):
And pread An I had record.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
Oh my gosh, Telly was singing it too.
Speaker 3 (24:12):
Uh picked your pains, that does.
Speaker 1 (24:14):
And uh, these images that have come out of Coburger, listen,
I gotta tell you. And I, uh, I'm in no
way pro Coburger, but these are and I don't know
if these are going to be admitted into evidence because
(24:36):
on one level, you know, just when you see the
sinister nature of them, because they do, they do look sinister.
And remember we've been warned not to look at his eyes.
You know, we can't. Defenses sucked, you can't because of
his condition. You know, he's got that blank stare. You know,
he wears he's you know, he stares off in the distance.
(24:57):
You know. I've been locked up in a room with
a lot of people over the years, uh when I'm lecturing,
and they've got blank stares as well, you know. So
I don't know how much can be read into that.
And and but when they did release these, these these
images of him, you know, with the hoodie on and
(25:18):
he's got like a watchcaps knit cap to bogging thing
on under it, and you know he looks like you know,
he's very dark looking at it. You know, he's got
the thing kind of drawn down like a Holocaust cloak,
you know, like monks used to wear. Uh, it's got that,
it's got that weird, you know, kind of vibe to it.
Is that part of the evidence. Is this the trove
(25:40):
of evidence, some of the electronic evidence, it's going to
be presented in court? And if it is, how on
the whole dateline get their hands on it?
Speaker 3 (25:50):
I don't know how they got it. I don't know.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
I do know that I've made a number of calls
trying to find out it's some information to verify things,
and I'm I'm not finding it out, but you know,
you do have an investigation that if you remember early on,
remember they had the the person who was the not
the medical examiner, but they were like voted in on
(26:16):
the corner, like yeah, the corner. Yeah, how the corner
gave out information yes, early on that we would never
hear before, you know, from a No, I don't want
to say a legitimate source, but you know what I'm saying,
that was a very unusual way to get information.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
The way it was.
Speaker 1 (26:32):
Little God, it was when I when that dropped, when
that person dropped that information. First off, she actually stated
that they all appeared to have been asleep, you know,
and my you know, I thought at that time, now,
if we were to believe what's going on with this
(26:54):
new data that's coming out, it's confirmation to me, did
you even go to the scene and see the you know,
how long were you there with the bodies that you
would make these observations because I got to tell you,
I don't know what appears to have been asleep means
(27:14):
did Xana sleep on the floor? Is that what you mean?
Because and again it's it's skewed. That's an area that
the corner never should open up about on any kind
of case. And Dave, I don't care how in what
far flung area of the country you're in. That's like
a minimal that's kind of a baseline of knowledge that
(27:35):
every corner has. We've had the national standards in place
now for medical legal death investigators since nineteen ninety eight.
That's like a one of the things that we kind
of pound into people's heads in that training that we
established all those years ago was that you worked together
as a team when you're talking about a homicide day,
(27:56):
particularly especially one that is unsolved. You're an elected official,
you're separate from the cops. You can say what you
want to say. But let me tell you this, I
don't see her getting Christmas cards in the future, you
know what I mean. She ain't gonna be invited to
(28:16):
the Christmas party all right in the wake of this,
because that is it's foreboden. You don't do this, You
don't step outside what I refer to as the investigative bubble,
because there's no telling who's listening. And unless they told
her just to say these things, and I can't imagine
(28:37):
anybody would would have done that, I don't understand why
she felt compelled to begin to talk about these things
that seem to be inaccurate exactly that that's the most
gentle way that I can put that.
Speaker 3 (28:54):
I think you're being kind.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
I think that there's a number of issues here that
this dayline's special. Again, I don't know where they got
their information, but they felt comfortable enough with it from
a legal standpoint to put it on national network television
and nobody has come out to scream about it. So
it kind of makes you believe that there is information
that is available somehow. But a couple of questions I
(29:18):
still have, Joe, is that again? I go back to
Dylan Mortenson, and I really I don't want to beat
this dead horse. They tore the building down, they tore
the house down, and we have no way of going
in there to verify anything, because I have real questions
about the people they call survivors. I have real questions,
(29:39):
mainly because I haven't heard what actually transpired. But now
we've been told about Dylan being on the phone the
whole time, texting back and forth and on Indeed or
Facebook or whatever, and you know that seems to be
a little odd thing to do for eight hours and
then get up and you have this carnage going on.
You don't call nine one one. But again, stepping over that,
(30:05):
the timetable puts Xanakernodle ordering food at four o'clock in
the morning, yes, and it being delivered at four oh
eight something like that. So the timetable we're looking at
begins there with Xena and ends before four thirty according
(30:28):
to what we've been told. Right, so you've got a
twenty minute window where one guy is going to come
into a house with six people and he is going
to be able to brutally kill very quickly enough that
it was quick enough that he didn't wake up Ethan,
because they say Ethan was asleep when he was attacked.
(30:50):
Although I'm still wondering, how does he get something carved
into his leg? If he is the last victim and
he slept through the whole thing again, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
Just a whole lot responsible owned. You would think that
that would be something that would, you know, jolt you away.
Of course, we don't know about sequencing. Think. Let's okay,
let me let me throw.
Speaker 3 (31:09):
This at you. I was just going to ask you
figured that one out.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
Well, well, just let me throw this at you. Yeah,
if what date this is not Morgan saying this date line,
If what dateline is saying is accurate, okay, then what
are the what are the fatal wounds that Ethan would
have sustained. It's it's not going to be a carving
of the leg. Okay, that's not going to be fatal,
(31:33):
at least in the immediate You might exanguinate after a
period of time depended upon how deep, how deeply your
legs might have been cut. However, here's here's a here's
something I want to throw at you. What if he
was attacked in another area of his body. And then
after the fact this is done to him. You know,
(31:55):
that goes into an area of mutilation. And again I
know I'm projecting here. He's a male, He's only male
in domsaw wow. And I think back to a comment
that was made in this program by this person that
knew him over at Washington State, and she had invited him,
(32:18):
allegedly to a pool party and his eyes, according to her,
had locked on to these two young women that were
clad and mikini's and was just focused on them. He
knows nobody. This is like, we feel sorry for this guy.
We want to invite him in kind of introduce him
(32:39):
to It's probably other graduate students thasga's, those sorts of
people that are working toward the same goals, or maybe
employees that work in the department, and he can't take
his eyes off of them. As a matter of fact,
he interjects himself into a conversation with one of these
young women allegedly that was there with her husband. Never
(33:01):
acknowledged the husband. The entire conversation is having a conversation
like her with her allegedly like it goes something like,
you do you like rock climbing, do you like hiking?
You know, just completely inappropriate. And I think about that,
and you're dismissing the male that's there. And if what
(33:21):
they're talking about really and I don't know if this
was their point with a dateline special, that they maybe
perhaps are intimating that he did something to Ethan because
he's a male, he was there and there were these
other females. Maybe that's a long shot. I have no idea,
but I don't know. It's it's certainly something to think about.
Speaker 2 (33:44):
I don't think he was just out tuling around looking
at stars at four o'clock in the morning and said, hey,
there's a nice house.
Speaker 3 (33:49):
I think i'll go in and see. I can't kill anybody,
you know.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
No, no, this is this is a location that whoever
did this, whoever did this, had some level of familiarity
with it. And you know, that's another interesting bit that
they dropped here, Dave, is the fact that now, and
I don't know, this might be bigger than anything else
that now we've got new surveillance photos or surveillance video
(34:13):
from an adjacent house where you can and we've never
seen this before. That was one of the other big
reveals here where you can see what appears to be
a white Lantra that's that's making loops and passive. Do
you remember some of the other footage that we had
initially that we've talked about before, and it's real blurry.
(34:37):
This is not quite as blurry, and you can see
the car pass in multiple directions from that static camera
that was on an adjacent house. My wife and I were,
you know, kind of watching it the other other day,
just the video because I haven't seen the entire episode
of the dateline thing, and you know, we were saying, well,
(35:04):
if they have this camera, this videography, and here's where
I kind of will leave this. If they have this
videography and we've never seen it before, a big question
is what else do the police have that we haven't
seen yet. I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is Bodybacks
Quandy times, but Joseph Scott more so. This past Saturday,
I was mentioned in a post on X and you know,
I look down, my handle is on there and everything
and saying it's just gonna be some comment about, you know,
(00:25):
some case that's floating around there. Well, yeah, it was
about a case. And not only was it about a case,
it was about a very specific case. Because this was
on Saturday, and on Friday night apparently Dateline did an
episode on the Idaho four and of course the accused
(00:49):
is Brian Coberger. Boy, do I have a tale to
tell you, guys, because apparently apparently I have been viewed
by certain individuals that I'm prepared to discuss right now.
I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is body Backs. Dave
(01:16):
kidnap me over with a feather. I'm sitting there with
my Queen of the Homestead and we're having our morning
coffee as we do every day, my favorite time of day,
by the way, and I'm scrolling through the night's events,
(01:36):
catching up on X formerly known of course as Twitter,
and lo and behold, I've been tagged, and there before me,
I see a picture that is a screen grab off
of Dateline and it's my image. Apparently Ryan Coburger. According
(01:56):
to them at Dateline, they have information that states that
he's watching or listening to things on YouTube relative to
true crime and specifically these four homicides in which he
(02:17):
is accused of perpetrating. David got to tell you, brother,
not too many things send a chill up and spine.
It got my attention real quick when the Idaho case
kicked off. When we first had a national awareness of it,
my wife and I were just as shocked. It was
(02:39):
on a Sunday and it hit the news that afternoon.
The next day that Monday, I was on national television
and it seemed like, for oh my lord, it was
like solid for like three weeks. I just had phone
calls coming in from all of these different networks, podcast,
(03:00):
YouTube channels, and all this sort of thing. So the
fact that I would pop up on his radar, I
guess because he's seeking I think if you continue with
this line of logic here, that Dateline is putting forward.
This isn't me putting this forward, is date Line. I
(03:20):
would think that he's seeking information from individuals that may
have practiced in the past, because if you're you know,
if you're in kind of the atmosphere that I'm in
right now. I don't work in the field anymore. I'm
a teacher and then I do commentary. So I bring
my knowledge from, you know, as a practitioner and as
(03:43):
an educator to most of the stuff that I do,
and I just talk about it. And look, I'm not
the only one. I'm sure that there were multiple, multiple
locations that he visited along the way and just a
glean information. And I find that's very interesting what you mentioned, Dave.
(04:03):
People throw around that term narcissism quite a bit, and
it seems like it's in every other sentence now then
everybody's making a diagnosis of narcissism. I don't know if
that's the same as being egocentric or I guess there's
shades of this involved in everything. But I'm interested in
(04:26):
what you have to say about. Was he seeking information
about the case potentially or was he scratching that edge
to see his name or see not his name. We
wouldn't have known it at that time, but to see
the shock that it elicits from the general public. You know,
(04:48):
every time there's some breathless reporter that comes on the air,
to talk about some little new thing that has developed.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
I wonder why John, Yeah, why he But not I
kind of I'm more like, I wonder why he's listening
or watching that particular show. But I really I think
it's feeding his ego, you know, getting his name mentioned.
But I think it's also you got to remember he's
also a student, so almost a professional student in his life.
(05:20):
You know, he didn't really go out of the educational atmosphere.
But I think based on what we know of him,
and it makes sense that he would be driven to
watch or listen to a professor give a breakdown as
opposed to a clinician. It just makes sense to me
(05:41):
that he would be that he. I don't want to
say that he's a you know, he's drawn to you,
but it makes sense to me that he would care
what your opinion was because as a student, he wants
to impress the professor, and as a suspected killer, you know,
he wants as much fame. He's not gonna get away
with it. At this point that they've pretty much made
(06:02):
sure that the judge has made sure that everything that
they didn't want in is coming in. And so at
this point I think they're trying to mitigate the death penalty.
You know, is there a way that we can avoid that?
Speaker 1 (06:13):
Yeah, I mean Exhibit one A is autism, right, yeah,
because autism has nothing to do with him his appearance
in court.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
You mentioned.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
I love that word mitigate. By the way, they're trying
to mitigate the death penalty here, they're trying to say
that he's he's not eligible because he's diagnosed with autism,
which you know is.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
You're mentally handicapped. Because of that, then how did you
get to be in to be in a college level
a program you know, that just doesn't hold wall. That
is just a bucket full of holes man?
Speaker 3 (06:49):
Really?
Speaker 1 (06:49):
Yeah? And that based on listen listen. People that would
that would make a different argument will say, well, you
don't understand the spectrum is nuanced. I I mean, how
many times have we heard that? And look, that's gonna
be The people that say that are making the same
argument that the defense is making.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
You and I have had this conversation about the on
the spectrum with regard to my grandson.
Speaker 1 (07:15):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
As soon as that started coming out on this, I went, really,
you're going to play this card. Let's see how far
they go, and having seen it up close and personal,
I wasn't shocked that they tried to play it. I'm
thankful that nobody bought it. Well, I'm not shocked the
game looking for you.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
I want to interject one more thing and about this
as well. People throw around this term in cell. Oh yeah,
so you know they'll say, uh, you know, I'll just
see random comments that will pop up on social media
and they'll say classic insul And I'm thinking, Okay, how
(07:58):
did that? How'd you arrive at that dog noo is?
Because I can tell you this. There is a manual
that mental health workers use. It's called the DSM, and
it's in multiple iterations, and I think they're in like
the third third. I'm sorry, excuse me, they're in the
fifth iteration of this now nowhere in that manual or
(08:18):
you can go in there and find the term in cell.
And the way this manual, the DSM works is that, yeah,
it helps you make diagnoses, but you know what else
they do. There's a code in there so that when
mental health people are making a diagnosis, they have to
enter that code onto their insurance forms in order to
get reimbursed. So if there was money to be made
(08:42):
with a diagnosis of being an in cell And I
don't even know what you would call it, in cell titis,
in cell itis. I have no idea that that implies
an infection. There's no such thing in the mental health
world as being an in cell. This is a uh,
a term that has been created to categorize a certain
(09:04):
group of men. And so they've used this term for him,
and you know, they just kind of throw these terms
around like that.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
If you don't know what in cel means, it means
involuntarily sulibate.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
It's for guys who have trouble with girls.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
And and to be honest with you, they would have
a problem with most guys, you know, based on the
way they talk, act and think. They're not the type
of individual I know anybody would hang out with.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
And so I think it's weird. I mean, most of
the time people are you know, you come across somebody
in there, you know, I don't know, eccentric maybe.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
But that's a great term.
Speaker 1 (09:52):
Yeah, yeah, eccentricity, you know, And uh, I have a
touch of that in me. I'm a college professor. I'm
it's actually mandated in my contract every year you must
be eccentric because you're a college professor, but you know,
back to this idea of him. Can I tell you
one other thing that happened to me on Saturday morning
(10:12):
as I sat there with my with my bride and
my cup of Joe's.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
Weird to hear you call it a cup of Joe.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
I know it is kind of weird, isn't it. I
sat there and as I'm sipping on my coffee and
I'm kind of absorbing this thing, the first thing that
jumped into my mind's eye was what did I say?
What did I say? Did I Did I say anything
(10:41):
that could have been taken by this individual and had
some kind of utility for them? And you can't think
that way. But that's not it's not outside. I mean,
we go to crime con and I actually have people
that will walk up to me. Happens almost every crime con.
They'll say, do you feel like that you're teaching killers
(11:05):
out there? Perspective killers? And no, I'm teaching forensics. I mean,
all are welcome at the table, I guess, but you know,
you can't tell who's out there in the audience when
you're making any kind of comment. You could say the
same thing I guess about the people that are on Dateline.
I mean, they do this, They've done this for years.
(11:25):
You know, they have that sloted time and there are
people that can't go without watching Dateline. Hey, that's cool
if that's what you're what you're all about. But you
know they're disseminating information as well. But you know, I
had that, I've had that thought. You know, that's come
up in my mind, you know, over the years, you know,
(11:45):
thinking about you know, who's within the sound of my voice.
And I look, if you think that's bad, I think
now about my academic colleagues that are at the Sales University.
And now all of these years later, after this massacre
(12:11):
in Moscow, Idaho took place, I really wonder are they thinking,
are they thinking, what do we teach you? Well, brother Dave,
(12:40):
Aside from my mug appearing on television and the shock
my own personal pearl clutching that took place over it,
they did. They did have information that they revealed and
a lot of stuff with stuff that we had not
heard before, you know, kind of this as it applies
(13:02):
to what was going on within the house. And you know,
my question, I think one of my big questions is
how'd they come into this information Dateline, that is, was
there a source within some department up there, you know?
And I don't know. I'm not going to even state
any department. I'm just going to say that there are
(13:24):
multiple departments that are involved in the investigation of these
four homicides. If the folks at Dateline, the producers felt
this strongly that they would produce this thing. And I
bet you dollars to know, Netes Brother, that this episode,
(13:45):
I bet they had some of the highest ratings they've
had in a while, just simply based on this, on
this particular episode, because there were a couple of really
big reveals in this day.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
And they built it up right.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
They did a good job promoting it, you know, And
there's a zeitgeis here with this particular killing, this murderer
of whatever.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
You know.
Speaker 2 (14:06):
To call a topic popular when you're dealing with the
deaths of four college students is mind numbing. It shows
you a lot about how we look at things. But
you know, every time now that we talk about the
Coburger story, the murders, I'm gonna be honest, Joe, I
have a twinge of hurt for you over what happened
in Orlando at crime Con when you were giving an
(14:28):
incredibly you did a loving tribute to the students, to
the victims. You talked with a lot of care about
what they went through and what happened, and you kind
of got at the very end, you know, I felt
like that you were not treated the way you should
have been treated.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
By somebody, and that bothered me.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
And so every time we cover this story, I think
about how, no matter hard you work to take care
of talking about the individuals, you and I are both victim,
the kids, and whenever we're not seen that way, it
bothers me.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
And yeah it does. And listen, it's like I said before,
you know, not turning down any kind of offer that's made,
even in those circumstances, which, by the way, I think
I've made mentioned this before. But it was in a
room of thirty four hundred people. Yeah, I don't think
that I've ever spoken to a crowd that large before.
(15:24):
I couldn't see the back of the room. You know,
first off, there's lights in your eyes. It was awesome,
but I could tell there were a lot of people,
and so I couldn't I couldn't see beyond it. But yeah,
and it was a learning experience and you never know,
you know, you never know what's going to bubble up
out of that. But when you think about what Dateline
(15:51):
has done in talking about this case, thirty four hundred people,
is nothing that happened that night or that afternoon, you know,
with me me, you think about the people that they reach,
and there's not going to be aybody standing up and
making some kind of comment in the crowd. This is
going to be about something else. You know, there might
(16:13):
be people at home screaming at the television screen for
all I know. I have no idea. But when you
get into like that kind of real granular detail about
what they are being told, and I have to think
that they're being told because they're not investigators. I think that,
(16:38):
you know, the most striking thing that came out of
this is that there was one part I believe where
they they allege that Xanna may have gone upstairs when
she heard a noise. Now I don't know how they
validate that. I don't know how they come up with that.
And then of course she is perhaps it's kind of
(17:01):
implied that maybe she was chased back downstairs by Coburger
he goes into the room attacks her. You know, she
had been up, she had received the order, that they
had done the food order. She was awake, And it
deviates from what we had heard about Ethan because now
they're saying that Ethan most likely was asleep in bed.
(17:25):
And we know what we have been what we have
heard previously about Xanna and her injuries where you've got
these sharp force injuries that literally go down to the
cartilage in her fingers where there's either blade grabbing going
on in a defensive posture or she's been stabbed in
the hand, and of course she's brutalized at that point.
(17:48):
And then you know, my lord, the information that Dayline
is saying, again not Morgan saying it. What they're talking
about relative to Ethan. You know, we've heard that Ethan.
I think there was one iteration where they said Ethan
was on the floor and uh, just adjacent to the
(18:09):
door and he'd had a really nasty injury to his neck.
That according to that doesn't square with what Dayline is saying,
because Dayline and correct me if I'm wrong. Dave Dayline
said that Ethan's leg or legs were carved up with
(18:31):
sharp force injury and that he was in the bed,
so that it completely changes the dynamic of what we
had known about this case to begin with. Am I
am I right? Isn't that what I said?
Speaker 2 (18:43):
And you know when I saw that, I thought, this
is new. This is not information that we have had
up to this point. As a matter of fact, a
lot of the stuff that we're being told now are
things we had didn't know or things that they don't
make sense to be honest with you. You know, we
were told at first that Dylan Mortenson, you know, the
(19:05):
the bushy the one who described the bushy eyebrows, that
Dylan you know, that she heard something and went back
and went to sleep and woke up around noon.
Speaker 1 (19:13):
You know.
Speaker 2 (19:14):
Now we find out that Dylan Mortenson was on the
phone all the time. So there's a lot of things.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Actually, And I think that information actually came out prior
to the Dateline special. It did, and that was like
week week or week before last.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
Yes, I think it was a slow trickle of things and.
Speaker 1 (19:35):
That has that has gone gone on.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
You know, Joe, I remember back to the Scott Peterson case,
and do you remember what happened between the first day
of the trial and the last day, other than all
the evidence, there was a really big reveal, a really
big change happened. And it's because that that whenever I
(20:01):
see a trickle of information coming out or something that
is really counter to what we believe up to this moment,
I realize that investigators don't have all the truth yet
they're still figuring it out. In the Peterson case, the
investigators the prosecutors open by saying they believe Lacy Peterson
(20:24):
was killed on December twenty third. Yeah, and by the
end of the trial it was proved that no, she
wasn't killed in she was killed on Christmas Eve.
Speaker 3 (20:36):
That's a pretty big difference.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
Yeah, And that's why when something like that can happen
in a major crime that had all the world's attention
and still does. Peterson still has huge ratings. The guy's
got the La Innocence Project. I mean, everybody's working on
this thing. And you know, I'll be honest with you, Joe,
if investigators had that part wrong, I got a feeling.
(21:01):
Look I think he did it, but go ahead and
look at it again. But in this case, how do
you go from saying the reason we didn't get a
nine one one call until noon. Is because the roommate
was asleep. After she sees a guy with bushy hair
is bolting out the door, she just goes and lays
down and crashes out. But then we find out she
was on the phone the whole time. It can't be both,
(21:23):
It has to be one of the other.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Yeah, this is not one of these things where two
things can be right at the same time. You know.
I hear that phrase come up a lot now in
our conversations all around, And so what do you think, Yeah,
I don't. I don't think that. I don't. I guess
that if you're stating not you. But they, if they
(21:45):
are stating that they have information now that indicates that
there was phone activity. Remember we got those text you know,
talking about run run to me expletive, you know, all
these sorts of things. And there was even one one
bit that came out recently. And I don't know how
they concluded this that Dylan actually saw Xana's body and
(22:11):
maybe thought she was sleeping. But I got to tell you,
I don't know what the degree of lighting was in
that environment. And I know she's not a trained professional,
at least I don't think she is. She in my estimation,
the area around her would have been super saturated with blood.
(22:32):
So how can you merely, when you're looking over your
shoulder just say, yes, she was sleeping, And why would
she be sleeping on the floor. I mean, what are
you thinking she passed out? She passed out drunk, because
that doesn't seem like something she would have done necessarily.
She staid with her boyfriend. And look, I know that
(22:52):
there's we don't know yet alcohol had been imbibed. I
mean they had come from a fraternity party, you know,
and every one of my fraternity parties, I can tell
you they were not teetotalers there neither was I was
chief among sinners. And so I got to tell you,
I think about this, and I think about the information
(23:14):
that has been provided along the way at about the
circumstances that night, maybe even leading up to that day's events,
and what happened afterwards. I'm still I still think, Dave,
that at this point in time, I still have more
(23:35):
questions than I do answers. Let's see adage, Dave, A
picture's wors what one thousand words is that? What they
(23:56):
say is that I get confused sometimes.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Your paints a thousand words.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
Come on, this is David Gates.
Speaker 3 (24:04):
And pread An I had record.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
Oh my gosh, Telly was singing it too.
Speaker 3 (24:12):
Uh picked your pains, that does.
Speaker 1 (24:14):
And uh, these images that have come out of Coburger, listen,
I gotta tell you. And I, uh, I'm in no
way pro Coburger, but these are and I don't know
if these are going to be admitted into evidence because
(24:36):
on one level, you know, just when you see the
sinister nature of them, because they do, they do look sinister.
And remember we've been warned not to look at his eyes.
You know, we can't. Defenses sucked, you can't because of
his condition. You know, he's got that blank stare. You know,
he wears he's you know, he stares off in the distance.
(24:57):
You know. I've been locked up in a room with
a lot of people over the years, uh when I'm lecturing,
and they've got blank stares as well, you know. So
I don't know how much can be read into that.
And and but when they did release these, these these
images of him, you know, with the hoodie on and
(25:18):
he's got like a watchcaps knit cap to bogging thing
on under it, and you know he looks like you know,
he's very dark looking at it. You know, he's got
the thing kind of drawn down like a Holocaust cloak,
you know, like monks used to wear. Uh, it's got that,
it's got that weird, you know, kind of vibe to it.
Is that part of the evidence. Is this the trove
(25:40):
of evidence, some of the electronic evidence, it's going to
be presented in court? And if it is, how on
the whole dateline get their hands on it?
Speaker 3 (25:50):
I don't know how they got it. I don't know.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
I do know that I've made a number of calls
trying to find out it's some information to verify things,
and I'm I'm not finding it out, but you know,
you do have an investigation that if you remember early on,
remember they had the the person who was the not
the medical examiner, but they were like voted in on
(26:16):
the corner, like yeah, the corner. Yeah, how the corner
gave out information yes, early on that we would never
hear before, you know, from a No, I don't want
to say a legitimate source, but you know what I'm saying,
that was a very unusual way to get information.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
The way it was.
Speaker 1 (26:32):
Little God, it was when I when that dropped, when
that person dropped that information. First off, she actually stated
that they all appeared to have been asleep, you know,
and my you know, I thought at that time, now,
if we were to believe what's going on with this
(26:54):
new data that's coming out, it's confirmation to me, did
you even go to the scene and see the you know,
how long were you there with the bodies that you
would make these observations because I got to tell you,
I don't know what appears to have been asleep means
(27:14):
did Xana sleep on the floor? Is that what you mean?
Because and again it's it's skewed. That's an area that
the corner never should open up about on any kind
of case. And Dave, I don't care how in what
far flung area of the country you're in. That's like
a minimal that's kind of a baseline of knowledge that
(27:35):
every corner has. We've had the national standards in place
now for medical legal death investigators since nineteen ninety eight.
That's like a one of the things that we kind
of pound into people's heads in that training that we
established all those years ago was that you worked together
as a team when you're talking about a homicide day,
(27:56):
particularly especially one that is unsolved. You're an elected official,
you're separate from the cops. You can say what you
want to say. But let me tell you this, I
don't see her getting Christmas cards in the future, you
know what I mean. She ain't gonna be invited to
(28:16):
the Christmas party all right in the wake of this,
because that is it's foreboden. You don't do this, You
don't step outside what I refer to as the investigative bubble,
because there's no telling who's listening. And unless they told
her just to say these things, and I can't imagine
(28:37):
anybody would would have done that, I don't understand why
she felt compelled to begin to talk about these things
that seem to be inaccurate exactly that that's the most
gentle way that I can put that.
Speaker 3 (28:54):
I think you're being kind.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
I think that there's a number of issues here that
this dayline's special. Again, I don't know where they got
their information, but they felt comfortable enough with it from
a legal standpoint to put it on national network television
and nobody has come out to scream about it. So
it kind of makes you believe that there is information
that is available somehow. But a couple of questions I
(29:18):
still have, Joe, is that again? I go back to
Dylan Mortenson, and I really I don't want to beat
this dead horse. They tore the building down, they tore
the house down, and we have no way of going
in there to verify anything, because I have real questions
about the people they call survivors. I have real questions,
(29:39):
mainly because I haven't heard what actually transpired. But now
we've been told about Dylan being on the phone the
whole time, texting back and forth and on Indeed or
Facebook or whatever, and you know that seems to be
a little odd thing to do for eight hours and
then get up and you have this carnage going on.
You don't call nine one one. But again, stepping over that,
(30:05):
the timetable puts Xanakernodle ordering food at four o'clock in
the morning, yes, and it being delivered at four oh
eight something like that. So the timetable we're looking at
begins there with Xena and ends before four thirty according
(30:28):
to what we've been told. Right, so you've got a
twenty minute window where one guy is going to come
into a house with six people and he is going
to be able to brutally kill very quickly enough that
it was quick enough that he didn't wake up Ethan,
because they say Ethan was asleep when he was attacked.
(30:50):
Although I'm still wondering, how does he get something carved
into his leg? If he is the last victim and
he slept through the whole thing again, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
Just a whole lot responsible owned. You would think that
that would be something that would, you know, jolt you away.
Of course, we don't know about sequencing. Think. Let's okay,
let me let me throw.
Speaker 3 (31:09):
This at you. I was just going to ask you
figured that one out.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
Well, well, just let me throw this at you. Yeah,
if what date this is not Morgan saying this date line,
If what dateline is saying is accurate, okay, then what
are the what are the fatal wounds that Ethan would
have sustained. It's it's not going to be a carving
of the leg. Okay, that's not going to be fatal,
(31:33):
at least in the immediate You might exanguinate after a
period of time depended upon how deep, how deeply your
legs might have been cut. However, here's here's a here's
something I want to throw at you. What if he
was attacked in another area of his body. And then
after the fact this is done to him. You know,
(31:55):
that goes into an area of mutilation. And again I
know I'm projecting here. He's a male, He's only male
in domsaw wow. And I think back to a comment
that was made in this program by this person that
knew him over at Washington State, and she had invited him,
(32:18):
allegedly to a pool party and his eyes, according to her,
had locked on to these two young women that were
clad and mikini's and was just focused on them. He
knows nobody. This is like, we feel sorry for this guy.
We want to invite him in kind of introduce him
(32:39):
to It's probably other graduate students thasga's, those sorts of
people that are working toward the same goals, or maybe
employees that work in the department, and he can't take
his eyes off of them. As a matter of fact,
he interjects himself into a conversation with one of these
young women allegedly that was there with her husband. Never
(33:01):
acknowledged the husband. The entire conversation is having a conversation
like her with her allegedly like it goes something like,
you do you like rock climbing, do you like hiking?
You know, just completely inappropriate. And I think about that,
and you're dismissing the male that's there. And if what
(33:21):
they're talking about really and I don't know if this
was their point with a dateline special, that they maybe
perhaps are intimating that he did something to Ethan because
he's a male, he was there and there were these
other females. Maybe that's a long shot. I have no idea,
but I don't know. It's it's certainly something to think about.
Speaker 2 (33:44):
I don't think he was just out tuling around looking
at stars at four o'clock in the morning and said, hey,
there's a nice house.
Speaker 3 (33:49):
I think i'll go in and see. I can't kill anybody,
you know.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
No, no, this is this is a location that whoever
did this, whoever did this, had some level of familiarity
with it. And you know, that's another interesting bit that
they dropped here, Dave, is the fact that now, and
I don't know, this might be bigger than anything else
that now we've got new surveillance photos or surveillance video
(34:13):
from an adjacent house where you can and we've never
seen this before. That was one of the other big
reveals here where you can see what appears to be
a white Lantra that's that's making loops and passive. Do
you remember some of the other footage that we had
initially that we've talked about before, and it's real blurry.
(34:37):
This is not quite as blurry, and you can see
the car pass in multiple directions from that static camera
that was on an adjacent house. My wife and I were,
you know, kind of watching it the other other day,
just the video because I haven't seen the entire episode
of the dateline thing, and you know, we were saying, well,
(35:04):
if they have this camera, this videography, and here's where
I kind of will leave this. If they have this
videography and we've never seen it before, a big question
is what else do the police have that we haven't
seen yet. I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is Bodybacks
Host
Joseph Scott Morgan
Popular Podcasts
Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial
Introducing… Aubrey O’Day Diddy’s former protege, television personality, platinum selling music artist, Danity Kane alum Aubrey O’Day joins veteran journalists Amy Robach and TJ Holmes to provide a unique perspective on the trial that has captivated the attention of the nation. Join them throughout the trial as they discuss, debate, and dissect every detail, every aspect of the proceedings. Aubrey will offer her opinions and expertise, as only she is qualified to do given her first-hand knowledge. From her days on Making the Band, as she emerged as the breakout star, the truth of the situation would be the opposite of the glitz and glamour. Listen throughout every minute of the trial, for this exclusive coverage. Amy Robach and TJ Holmes present Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial, an iHeartRadio podcast.
Betrayal: Season 4
Karoline Borega married a man of honor – a respected Colorado Springs Police officer. She knew there would be sacrifices to accommodate her husband’s career. But she had no idea that he was using his badge to fool everyone. This season, we expose a man who swore two sacred oaths—one to his badge, one to his bride—and broke them both. We follow Karoline as she questions everything she thought she knew about her partner of over 20 years. And make sure to check out Seasons 1-3 of Betrayal, along with Betrayal Weekly Season 1.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.