January 10, 2024 • 43 mins
As Bryan Kohberger’s defense team tries again to get a judge to toss out the indictment against Kohberger, the home where the four murders took place is now gone.
The clapboard house located at 1122 King Road, Moscow has been torn down, with the entire front of the building razed from sight in roughly 15 minutes. According to school officials, demolition was set for during the school's winter break, when fewer students would be in the area. It took just 90 minutes in total, for the home to become a pile of rubble.
The debris, loaded up by two contractors, was taken to a secret area for disposal. The site was combed for not a single item to be left behind for the curious to find and keep as a macabre souvenir. One local who wished to remain anonymous said 'They want nothing left for ghouls to plunder.'
Some, however, are still concerned that the best evidence in this case is now gone. The home was scanned using 3D imaging to allow the jury to be brought into the home and take a virtual tour where they wouldn't have been able to go.
The families of the four students killed in the house on King Road were not in agreement on the demolition. The Goncalves and Kernodle families issued a statement before the demolition, asking the university to wait to tear the building down until Kohberger's trial is completed.
The Goncalves' family said through their attorney, that the house “has evidentiary and emotional value."
In the statement, Goncalves wrote, "The family has stressed tirelessly to the Prosecution and the University of Idaho the importance (evidentiary and emotionally) that the King Road house carries but nobody seems to care enough."
She adds that the “families' opinion isn't a priority.”
The family of Ethan Chapin, who did not live there, offered its support for the demolition. In their statement, the Chapins said the demolition was needed "for the good of the University, its students (including our own kids), and the community of Moscow."
Joining Nancy Grace Today:
- Dale Carson – High-profile Attorney (Jacksonville), Former FBI Agent & Former Police Officer (Miami-Dade County); Author: “Arrest-Proof Yourself”
- Dr. Bethany Marshall – Psychoanalyst (Beverly Hills); Twitter: @DrBethanyLive/ Instagram & TikTok: drbethanymarshall; Appearing in the new show, “Paris in Love” on Peacock
- Chris McDonough – Director At the Cold Case Foundation, Former Homicide Detective; Host of YouTube channel: “The Interview Room”
- Dr. Cyril Wecht - Forensic Pathologist, Medical-legal consultant, Author of many books including “The Life and Deaths of Cyril Wecht: Memoirs of America’s Most Controversial Forensic Pathologist”
- Andy Kahan - Director of Victim Services and Advocacy at Crime Stoppers of Houston
- Rachel Schilke- Breaking News Reporter for The Washington Examiner; Twitter: @rachel_schilke
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 (00:05):
Crime Stories with Nancy Grease in the last hours, the
crime scene in Idaho in Moscow, where four beautiful students
were literally slaughtered, most likely.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
In their sleep, has been destroyed.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
That's right, totally demolished or was it? Is there any
speck left behind for scavengers seeking murderabilia?
Speaker 2 (00:42):
Is there anything left for them? And why? Why would
they do that?
Speaker 1 (00:50):
This as the defendant, suspect number one in the quadruple sleigh,
Brian Coburger, makes a last ditch effort to the judge
to have the case thrown out of court.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories.
Speaker 1 (01:06):
Thank you for being with us here at Crime Stories
and on Sirius XM one eleven.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
First of all, take a listen to this.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
It took just ninety minutes time for the infamous home
at eleven twenty two King Road to become nothing more
than a pile of rubble. The debris loaded up by
two contractors, taken to a secret area for disposal. The
site was combed for not a single item to be
left behind for the curious to find and keep as
a souvenir. One local, who wished to remain anonymous, said
(01:33):
they wanted nothing left for the rules to plunder.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Well, I hope that everything you just heard from our
friends at crime online dot com is true. Joining me
an all star panel to make sense of what we
know right now. Joining me in addition to the other
stars on the panel, Andy Kahn, director of Victim Services
and Advocacy Crime Stoppers Houston, who first coined the phrase
(01:57):
murderer Bilia, and Harold Schecter, author of Murderabilia, A History
of Crime in one hundred Objects. You know, a lot
of people would not be interested in that, I, however,
am extremely.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
Interested in that.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
Think about it, A history of crime in one hundred objects,
What objects and why. He is also the author of Maniac,
the Bath School Disaster, and the Birth of modern mass murder. Again,
that's certainly not everyone's cup of tea, however, it is
my cup of tea. You can find him at Haroldshacter
(02:33):
dot com.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
So let's start with them.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
Then I'll circle back to breaking news reporter with the
Washington Examiner, Rachel Schilke, who can tell you everything you
want to know about why the crime scene has been destroyed.
Speaker 2 (02:47):
But first, Andy Kahan joining us. Andy, thank you for
being with us.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
You and Harold both Andy, explain, what is murder rebelia?
And as far as I know, you coined that phrase
and greatly helped me and inspired me and my first
nonfiction book, Objection, where there is an entire chapter devoted
to what I learned from you called blood money Explain.
Speaker 4 (03:14):
Murderabilia is items that are associated with serial killers, mass murderers,
school shooters, high profile killers that are then peddled on
an open market, primarily the innet internet. So these are
items that are produced personally by some of the nation's
(03:34):
worst serial killers and mass murderers.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Let me just break it down because when I was
in your office, they're at Victims Advocacy in Texas.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
I believe you showed me somebody's toenails. Did you show
me somebody's toenails or their hair? What was it you
showed me?
Speaker 1 (03:51):
That was not the most disgusting thing I've ever seen,
but it definitely was in the top ten.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
What was it you showed me, Andy Kahan?
Speaker 4 (03:58):
So inside my duffel bag in my office, I actually
have murderabilia items that include serial killer hair samples, which
is like Charles Manson's hair that was sold in the
form of a swastika. I have actual fingernail clippings from
a California a serial killer. I have pieces of clothing,
(04:20):
I had objects that were actually taken from crime scenes itself.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
What kind of objects taken from crime scenes?
Speaker 1 (04:28):
Because That's what I'm worried about with the demolition of
the King Road address what objects have been taken from
a crime scene? Look, anything is fair game if some
gule gets I don't know, a piece of wood, a
piece of cement, a piece of fabric, a piece of furniture.
Speaker 4 (04:49):
Let me give you an example. Nancy hit me John
Wayne Gacy's cross space.
Speaker 5 (04:54):
There are over forty.
Speaker 4 (04:56):
People that were bidding for items. For dirt that was
scooped up and put into a plastic bag where Gacy
had buried over thirty young men.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Okay, stop right there. Dirt dirt from Jaysey's crawl space
beneath his home, the clown killer. He would lure, molest in,
murder little boys, and then bury the bodies in his
crawl space. People actually paid money for the dirt. How
(05:30):
much money?
Speaker 4 (05:30):
Well, they were paying anywhere from fifty to one hundred
dollars for little bags of dirt.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
Let's go to Harold Scheckter, joining US author of murderabilia,
A history of crime in one hundred objects. Harold, what
is wrong with these people? They're ghules, They're like vampires
sucking the marrow out of a crime scene.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
What is wrong with these people?
Speaker 6 (05:54):
Well, I think it's important to put the phenomenon in
some kind of historical context.
Speaker 5 (06:01):
You know.
Speaker 6 (06:02):
The only thing different now about collecting murder abelia is,
as Andy says, you can do it on the internet.
But the fact remains, if you look at the history
of crime, people have always wanted to own souvenirs connected
to very gruesome and sensational crimes.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Why do you say that, Harold Schachter, what's the oldest
example of murder abilia that you know of?
Speaker 6 (06:30):
Well, you know, back in the let's say seventeen hundreds,
when a condemned murderer was hanged, one of the perks
for the executioner was that he could keep the noose,
and the executioners would cut the nooses into one inch
(06:51):
pieces and sell them to these morbid souvenir hunters. You know,
one of the interesting things. I'm a historian of true crime.
You know, my books examined crimes going back to Shakespeare's time,
and every time there has been a very notorious murder,
(07:12):
people have flocked to the site of the murder and
often torn down, you know, the barns or the houses
where these crimes have taken place. I'll give you an
example in the eighteen seventies. I'm sure you've heard of
the Bender family. The Bender family was his family who
(07:35):
opened a roadside tavern in Kansas in the early eighteen seventies,
and when travelers, you know, weary travelers, would stay there,
the venders would murder them and take all their possessions
and bury their corpses in the apple orchard. When their
crimes were discovered, hundreds and hundreds of people descended on
(08:00):
the vendor property and basically tore down the house, you know,
coming away with these souvenirs. It's not a new phenomenon.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
No, it's really not. You're right to bring up the
Bender family. Guys. This is happening now, and I'm.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
Going to go to our legal expert to discuss what
does this mean legally if and when this case ever
goes to trial that there is no more crime scene
to visit. But first I want you to take a
listen to our forensic crime online.
Speaker 7 (08:29):
The clopboard house located at one one two two King Road,
has been torn down, with the entire front of the
building out of sight in roughly fifteen minutes. According to
school officials, demolition was set for during the school's winter break,
when fewer students would be in the area. The home, however,
has been digitized into a three D model using the
latest technology, and according to the prosecution and defense, the
(08:52):
actual building will serve no purpose in the upcoming trial.
So with all legal sides and agreement, the home that
was donated by its owner to the University of Idaho
has been raised.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Interesting that we hear from crime Online and the legal
parties that they're fine with the destruction of the home,
but in my mind, those most connected to this case disagree.
Take a listen to our cut seven to eleven from
Crime Stories.
Speaker 8 (09:20):
The families of the four students killed in the house
on King Road were not in agreement on the demolition.
The Gonzavez and Cronodle families issued a statement before the
demolition asking the university to wait to tear down the
building until Coberger's trial is completed. The Gonzavez family released
a statement through their attorneys saying the house has evidentiary
and emotional value. In the statement, Gonzavez wrote, quote, the
(09:42):
family has stressed tirelessly to the prosecution and the University
of Idaho the importance evidentiary and emotionally that the King
Road House carries, But nobody seems to carry enough. She writes,
the family's opinion isn't a priority. The family of Ethan Chapin,
who did not live there, offered support of the demolition.
In their statement that Chapins said the demolition was needed
(10:04):
quote for the good of the university, it's students, including
our kids, and the community of Moscow.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
This is what I think about that. I think that.
Speaker 1 (10:14):
There's a very strong possibility the jury would not have
seen the crime scene. Seeing the crime scene is very rare.
We only hear about it in high profile cases when
it does happen. Typically it does not happen. However, better
safe than sorry. I think rushing into the demolition of
the quadruple homicide was wrong at this juncture. That said,
(10:40):
I want to hear about this so called secret location,
and I want to hear about the destruction of the home,
and will circle back to the gules that are absolutely
trying to get memorabilia from the King Roade Home, no
question about that. Time stories with Nancy Grace joining me,
(11:13):
Rachel show Key along with the rest of our experts
breaking these Reporter Washington Examiner, Rachel, thank you for being
with us. Tell me about the destruction of the crime, Sayne, Well, the.
Speaker 9 (11:24):
House was originally supposed to be demolished in August, but
they delayed it because they were going through this court
process of deciding whether or not they were going to
keep the home standing or not. And then eventually the
home was destroyed over the student's winter break. The university
officials wanted to minimize any emotional damage that could do
on the students, and as we heard in those clips,
(11:45):
a lot of the family members were not okay with this.
They said that there could be evidentiary value, that this
could be very important if there was a jury that
could eventually see the home, or at least just to
have it there in case the evidence needs to be
put forward in court. So definitely was not the majority
opinion of most of the people involved.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
Where is you so called secret location where the timbers
and the scaffold everything went.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
Where is the secret location?
Speaker 4 (12:14):
Now?
Speaker 9 (12:15):
I'm actually not sure where that secret location.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
Is well, it won't take long to find out.
Speaker 1 (12:20):
Joining me again, high profile experts on the case. Chris
mcdunna joining me, who has visited the scene many many times,
Director at the Cold Case Foundation, former homicide detective, over
three hundred homicides under his belt, and host of a
YouTube channel where I found him the interview room. Chris mcdotta,
(12:41):
what do you think as a homicide detective, what do
you think, Antie?
Speaker 10 (12:45):
I think in one of these cases, in a case
like this, this is a huge mistake. This is just
my personal opinion. Is the fact that that building has
now gone I think the biggest problem. The State's going
to have digital and all of the other forensic stuff
that they've collected, that's not an issue, but the acoustics
(13:07):
of that home are going to play very important roles.
And the reason for that is within fifty feet of
that house, there is a video camera that allegedly picked
up moaning or something to that effect, and it's in
the affidavit. Now, if they didn't have an acoustic engineer
go in there and measure, then they've got a real problem.
(13:32):
And the other problem I see is early on with
the university, it sounded like, was you know, pushing this
destruction of this house. They said that both the defense
and the prosecution and sign off that's not a problem.
They'd stipulate it to that this is your lane, you
know more than anybody on this channel about you know
(13:53):
what we're talking about there. However, in this particular case,
the FBI returned later on after the civilian company that
was in there to clean the house shop, the FBI
returns to take digital, you know, a digital footprint. So
(14:14):
if I was a defense immediately, I would file motions
that that is uh, you know, painted evidence that they
collected because there's video of this company, the company that
was going to tear it down, walking in and out
of that house multiple times. And now the FBI shows
(14:35):
up just before it's going to be torn down, and
they decide to collect additional evidence.
Speaker 2 (14:40):
After it's being cleaned, right Chris mcdonna.
Speaker 10 (14:42):
Absolutely, And and so what evidence that that evidence will
never come in?
Speaker 11 (14:47):
Right?
Speaker 10 (14:47):
And it's I mean you you would fight forever if
you were the defense attorney to keep that evidence.
Speaker 1 (14:52):
If I were the prosecutor, I would not have wont
it torn down? Chris mcdonna absolutely, not yet, maybe one day,
of course, but not yet. I don't know why we
could not wait till after the trial. Now joining me
high profile lawyer out of the Jacksonville jurisdiction, former FBI agent,
former cop Miami Dade. Never lack of business. They're an
(15:14):
author of arrest proof yourself. You can find him at
Dale Carson Law dot com.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
Dale.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
I got a lot of prophesy tearing down the house,
and I want to go back to our murderabilia experts,
Andy Kahan and Harold Schechter. But Dale Carson, this doesn't
mean a hill of beans if when we hear both
sides agree, okay, Why because if it's a mistake that
they got rid of the house, the defense can use
(15:39):
that later if there is a conviction, there could be
a claim on appeal of an effective assistance of counsel
by that defense lawyer agreeing to the demolition. I mean,
is nobody thinking that a word appeal? You don't want
to win the case for it to be reversed on
a hill. I just think that we made a mad
(16:03):
dash to tear the house down, and for what right.
Speaker 5 (16:06):
There's no person turning it down. I've been to Thouance
of crime scene over my life, and I can simply
tell you that the destruction of the primary piece of
evidence is insane. That house gives you perspective, It gives
you a great many other vantage points.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Odell.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Just right there after, I watched Chris McDonough do his
drive through all over the town, all of the very
narrow roads, the streets, very narrow streets. I don't really
know that two cars can pass each other, especially in
that weather when it's snowing and the roads are icy,
(16:47):
and the hill that the house is up on a hill.
What I'm saying is the layout of the home and
seeing the home, as you're just saying, is so much
different than a picture. So when I saw Chris McDonough
driving through taking a video at about literally two miles
an hour, maybe I knew I had to go if
(17:10):
I were going to.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
Talk about this case knowledgeably. And when I got.
Speaker 1 (17:16):
There, as you're saying, deal Carson, it's so much different
than the photos depict. When I went up that hill
and went around the house to the back of the house,
it's three stories perched up there. I can just see
Coburger right now. I can just see him up there
(17:37):
in the dark looking down into that home.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
I mean you could throw a softball to it from
the vantage point.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
There was only a thin line of trees between the
house and where I was parked. I went there in
the morning, I went there in the afternoon, I went
there in the evening, and I went there in the
dead of night, after midnight to look down at the
house because somebody left a light on there.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Light in their deal.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Carson completely different than it looks in the pictures.
Speaker 5 (18:04):
Dale, And of course you could see directly in where
the women would be during the they're living there.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
Dale.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
I can even look into the home across the street
and tell you the name of the dishwashing liquid sitting
at the kitchen counter.
Speaker 5 (18:19):
That's incredible.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
That's how easy, how tight the space is.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
So what you're saying about a picture cannot explain it fully.
Speaker 5 (18:29):
No, that's power and dury. It's probably better for the
defense that it is gone from that perspective.
Speaker 2 (18:35):
Oh yeah, was that you Chris McDonald jumping in.
Speaker 10 (18:38):
So to your point, Nancy, the other thing that I
think is being overlooked here is the fact that one
of the search warrants we forget was to a company
called Extreme Networks. There was a search warrant filed on
January twenty fifth, twenty three and in that they're looking
for intrusion network intrusion into that residence. There was a
(19:04):
the one of the affiants, there is a detective by
the name of Neil er Errig. He now works for
the Secret Service and his expertise is network intrusion. Well,
whose laptop are they looking for? If we read that
search one, it says description or decrypted access to the
(19:24):
following computer Extreme network service tags Kaylee. They're looking for
network intrusion into Kaylee's computer.
Speaker 1 (19:35):
Can you a place stop talking like that? Network intrusion?
Are you saying somebody who's trying to hack Kale Gonsolvis's computer?
Speaker 2 (19:44):
Is that what you're saying?
Speaker 10 (19:45):
Yes, and I would submit to you it's whoever. If
it's BK, he's sitting in the back of that house
to your point, looking through those windows and tapping into
the network in that home.
Speaker 2 (19:59):
Once again, can you totally freaked me out?
Speaker 1 (20:01):
Chris mcdona doctor Cyril weck joining US renowned forensic pathologists,
medical legal consultant, author of so many books, including the
Life and Deaths of Cyril weckt Memoirs of America's most
controversial forensic pathologists. I would be inclined to agree with that,
(20:22):
Doctor Weck. Thank you for being with us. You've seen
so many many crime scenes and performed so many many autopsies.
What evidence, Doctor Wect could have been left behind.
Speaker 11 (20:37):
In the case of John O. Kennedy. All the statements
that your guests have made are extremely applicable and extremely reverant.
They're talking about taking down the Texas Schoolbook Repository building
and even maybe reconstructed the grassal area where us the
(21:03):
most critics believe additional shots were fired. So I strongly
believe and without repeating, everything that the gentlemen and lady
have made are extremely important. I concur fully and strongly
agree that there is no needs, no rush, no purpose,
(21:27):
and tearing down the critical physical site associated with those
particular mergers.
Speaker 1 (21:34):
I agree with you, Doctor wit and for all I know,
the jury may not be allowed to visit, they may
not even want to visit, which I doubt. I'm sure
they'll want to visit it. But now that opportunity is
forever gone, it cannot.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Be sumpty dupty. You can't put it back together again.
Why they did it? I don't know. I'm not saying
never do it. I'm not saying don't do it before
the trial.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Back to Harold Schechter and Andy Kahn, and then we're
going to highly recognize psychoanalysts joining us out of Beverly Hills,
Doctor Bethany Marshall. Back to you, Andy Cohn. I understand it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Rachel Shilkey. I understand that
all of the lumber, all of the foundation, everything, the bookshelves,
(22:23):
the whatever, the kitchen, the bathroom, articles, everything was raised early.
Speaker 2 (22:30):
In the morning by eight a m. Under the cover
of darkness.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
The Clapbird House at eleven twenty two King Road in
Moscow was gone after just ninety minutes. I understand that
everything was taken, Rachel Shilkey.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Is this correct? And buried in an undisclosed location? Is
that true? Rachel?
Speaker 9 (22:51):
That's what a lot of the reports are saying. It
obviously has not been officially confirmed, but it is possible
that all of those materials are still with us. We
just are not sure where they are at this moment.
Speaker 1 (23:03):
Andy Kahan, So your experience that these ghuls, they are
akin to grave robbers. They'll stop at nothing to get
a piece of this house.
Speaker 4 (23:13):
No, and there's actually precdent for this, but the key
distinguishing piece on the two other homes that were raised
in Ohio, one which was Ariel Castro that you might
remember was the one that kidnapped and sexually tortured three
young women for over a decade and kept him in
his house.
Speaker 10 (23:32):
Part of his plea.
Speaker 4 (23:33):
Deal was again after he was convicted, that his house
would be raised and torn down so that nobody could
get a quote, a piece of a prize that could
be sold.
Speaker 5 (23:46):
Ohio did the same.
Speaker 4 (23:47):
Thing with Anthony Soell, a serial killer that murdered eleven
women at that time, after he was convicted keyword after convicted,
they raised his house again. So I get why they
would want to do this, but I agree with you
and some of your other panelists that there's no real
(24:08):
sense of urgency right now. But trust me, this is
just going to be the beginning and the merchandising of
Brian Coberger because when he actually does get convicted and
gets in the Idaho penitentiary, the murder billy dealers are
going to come after him and Droves because he's a
treasure trove for profiting for them.
Speaker 12 (24:28):
Dancy if I could interrupt just for a second about
a very good reason to keep the house instead of
having torn it down. Sure, you know, there's nothing like
walking into a space and feeling what happens there. Like history.
It's one thing to like assumb through a book and
look at wars and you know young people that were
killed in wars. It's another thing to stand on a
(24:50):
hilly knoll or a war field and say, young people
died here.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
Harold Schancktery joining us, author of Murderabilia, A History of
Crime in one hundred Objects, Harold Dictor, what do you
believe that these ghouls would try to get from the house?
Speaker 6 (25:06):
Well, I mean, you know, any little object connected with
it immediately achieves again this kind of ghoulish value or
murder abelia collectors. You know, in the past, I wrote
a book, for example, about a mass murderer named Anton
Propes back in the eighteen sixties who butchered an entire family.
(25:29):
He lured each member one by one into the barn
and then slaughtered them with an axe. And again, when
those crimes were uncovered and these hordes of people descended
on the site, they you know, ripped up the floorboards
of the you know of the of the barn and
the ones that you know, the pieces that had particular
(25:52):
value to them were ones that had bloodstains on them.
So again that illustrates two things. One, you know, this
is not something new. I think one of the important
things that it's important to consider is why we are
so drawn to and fascinated, you know, by these lurid, sensational,
(26:15):
horrific crimes.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
To begin with, Carol Schackter, I wondered that for many
many years. I don't know the answer to that, and
I'm just a jd. Okay, we need to shrink. You're right, Schackter.
Let's go straight to doctor Bethany Marshall renounce psycho Anas
joining us out of the Beverly Hills jurisdiction. Bethany, what
is wrong with these people? Did you hear what Scheckter said?
(26:38):
And I want to hear from Andy Kahn as well.
Speaker 2 (26:41):
The floor board would.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
Have more value, And I actually feel like I'm eating
a dirt sandwich right now.
Speaker 2 (26:48):
I want to just clean my tongue off.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
The floorboard would have more value if there was blood
on it.
Speaker 2 (26:55):
Sidney, please give me the tea.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
I think I need something a little stronger than tea
right now, But how could that be? Thank you, It's
got more value and these victim's blood. You know what,
I just had a flashback. My flashback is this doctor Bethany.
When I had to testify at my fiancee Keith's murder trial.
(27:17):
I remember coming down the witness.
Speaker 2 (27:20):
Seat was height up.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
I had to go up two flights of stairs to
get to it.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
It was equal to the judge up on his bench.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
And when I came down, I passed the state's table
and Keith's bloody denim shirt was there. I'm just trying
to get my head wrapped around who would want to
buy a bloody floorboard and what Schacter or Harold Schacter
told me. And I'm pretty sure Andy co is going
to agree that that floorboard or that mattress or that
(27:57):
bed sheet would fetch more money on the internet if
the victims of blood was on it.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Who are these people.
Speaker 12 (28:05):
You know, Nancy, I have to believe that these collectors
of this murderabilia present panel excluded, of course, are taking
some secret delight in the pain and suffering of the victims,
just like a murder or status takes delight in the
suffering of the victims. So do these collectors, you know, Nancy,
(28:26):
People feel that just because somebody is famous, they must
be fascinating. So like a BTK killer or a Casey Anthony,
just because we know a lot about them and they
are talked about on the air, or these people must
be fascinating, I want a piece of them. But the
fact is, criminals, murderers, perpetrators, they are incredibly boring people.
(28:51):
Have you ever sat and interviewed one, I'm sure you have.
You know, the crimes may be very notorious and sort
of horrible and hard to wrap one's mind around. But
when you sit with a criminal, their excitement is not
in the conversation with you, or about their travels, or
their children or the latest books they've read. They're so
(29:11):
preoccupied with their internal, sexualized, fetishized world of wanting to
kill people that they're not even present in the room
with you. So I think the public should not confuse
these criminals and their acts as being fascinating in any way.
And the fact is, when you have a floorboard with
(29:33):
blood on it in your home, you yourself become proxy
to the crime. I know that's a dramatic statement, not
in reality, it's not like you could be prosecuted for it.
But you are delighting in the anguish of the victims.
You are ignoring what their families have gone through, and
(29:53):
you have a whole imagination about what happened that has
nothing to do with reality.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
Time stories with Nancy Greece, Andy Kahn, you had to
buy your toenail and hair Stash can't believe I went
to law school three years at Mercery University and it
took me two years at NYU to get an l
and criminal and constitutional law And I'm saying your toenail Stash.
Speaker 2 (30:33):
I never thought those words would come out of my mouth,
but they did. You had to get it from somewhere.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
What freaks are dealing in a killer's toenails? And I
agree and disagree with Dr Bethany Marshall. I think some
people want a piece of these victims. They want the
bloody bed sheets, they want the bloody floorboard, and can
you and made the pain Andy con of the victims' families.
(31:05):
I mean, I'm sitting here right now wondering for the
first time because I really don't like to think about it,
and I try to avoid thinking about it. What happened
to Keith bloody shirt.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
Where is it? Did they destroy it?
Speaker 1 (31:16):
Is it in a plastic bag somewhere in an evidence room?
Speaker 2 (31:20):
I mean, can you imagine?
Speaker 1 (31:23):
And Andy, do you really think these ghules are gonna
give up? They're going to find where the home remains
were buried. They're going to find it, and they're going
to try and get it. But back to my original question,
who are these people? You had to buy those toenails somewhere?
Speaker 2 (31:44):
From who you know?
Speaker 4 (31:45):
From a victim's perspective, and as someone who's worked with
homicide survivors for over thirty years, there's absolutely nothing more
nauseating and discussing when you find out the person who
murdered one of your loved ones now has items being
hawked by third party dealers simply for pure profits. Like
(32:05):
it or not, you have small groups of people out here,
for whatever reason, idolized serial killers, mass murderers, high profile killers,
and they want to own a piece of their soul.
Speaker 10 (32:18):
And this is a untapped.
Speaker 4 (32:20):
Market that they've realized that not only can they own
a piece of whatever they have, they can also make
money off of it. So you have about seven dealers
throughout the country that specialized in obtaining items from high
profile killers strictly for the purpose of profiting, and anything
(32:41):
that you can get that has something associated with the victim.
Because I have actually seen items that were actually used
to kill their victims being sold at an open market.
That is like the ultimate get. It's like a treasure hunt,
and nothing is going to stop them from trying to
(33:02):
obtain items from the Idaho killer.
Speaker 2 (33:05):
Stop plays.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
I've got to go to Dale Carson on something. Dale,
do you ever, I mean, you and I have tried
a lot of cases. Everybody on this panel has dealt
with a lot of similar cases. Well, not similar to Idaho,
because that's quadruple murder, but murder cases. Dale, do you
ever just get sick to your stomach because everything Andy
(33:28):
con just said, Harold Schechter, doctor Cyril Wicked, everything they
said is correct, But something about, Hey, what about this?
Do you remember in the Bible how the Roman soldiers
gambled to try to get Christ's robe and his crown.
Speaker 2 (33:53):
Of thorns all that was left and took it somewhere.
I mean as far as I can. I mean, thinking
all the way back in history, how callous and awful
that is.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
Dale, Just thinking of someone trying to get remnants of
this home, and the more gory and the closer that
remnant was to one of the victims, the more valuable
it would be. Do you ever just want to quit
Dale Carson when you hear things like that.
Speaker 5 (34:24):
Oh, absolutely, you've missed one ceiling point. It's the smell
of a recent crime sheet, and it's pubbling because the
lines are lost basically no reason at all. Yes, all
the material wealth that they have gathered all these years
is of no meaning this one, right?
Speaker 2 (34:47):
Is this Harold?
Speaker 5 (34:47):
Or yeah?
Speaker 6 (34:48):
This is Harold? Can I just interject from ways?
Speaker 2 (34:51):
Yes?
Speaker 6 (34:51):
I mean, one word that we haven't been using so
far in this discussion is evil. And you know, evil
exerts its own very dark fascination often in the newspaper
articles that I've read, when reporters have seen these crowds
of morbid curiosity seekers descend on these places and come
(35:16):
away with bloody splinters and so on, they talk about
them as relics, And you know, there's a kind of
they're almost the flip side, the dark side, the shadow
side of saints relics. You know, Saints relics contains something
of the holy and the sacred, a lot of the murderabilia.
(35:36):
And again this is you know, not that these people
are conscious of it, but they're little objects you know
that you know that sort of resonate with the power
of evil, and there's something about you know, there's a
dark attraction to that for whatever reason. I mean our
you know, perhaps the psychoanalyst on our panel, whose name unfortunately.
Speaker 1 (35:59):
For doctor Bethany Marshall. Hey, let's follow up on what
Schechter is saying. You're hearing Harold Secter, author of murder Abelia.
What about it, doctor Bethany.
Speaker 13 (36:08):
Well, I think it is an aspect of evil. I
think that because it's not just like othering where you
know that somebody suffered but you're kind of callous to
it and you don't really care.
Speaker 12 (36:19):
This is at a whole other level. This is actually
taking delight in somebody suffering. That's really very different. It's
having the bloody shirt or the bloody floorboard and looking
at it and saying, aha, I have something, and you
are right. I have something of the victim. I have
something of the crime. I am inserting myself into the
(36:40):
notoriety of this case, and I feel important because of it.
It's really, you know, in one drop of blood is
an entire world of English and hurt, the English of
the families, the English of the victim, the English of
the community. That the reverberating effect of the crime, and
these people are clutching this one little relic and.
Speaker 13 (37:02):
They are happy.
Speaker 12 (37:03):
How different is that, Nancy than the perpetrator who acts out.
I mean, there's a difference between impulse and action. These
people are thinking the perpetrator is doing, but they're thinking
the same thing the perpetrators thinking. They're just not acting
out on it.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
Doctor Cerial Weck joining me, renowned pathologists who has seen
so many high profile autopsies, performed them and been to
so many crime scenes. Doctor wecked, in your opinion, what
could have benefited this jury had they been able to
go to the crime scene.
Speaker 11 (37:39):
I believe it would have been highly relevant for them
who have gone to the crime scene and two have
specifically visualized themselves from the sixth floor southeast core a
window where they claim as well did the shooting, and
then to replace themselves downstairs where the shots who were
(38:02):
heard and see whether it fits in with the audio
and with the video evidence. And also to have gone
then to the grassy ole area, a short distance away
where they claim where the critics claim there was a
second shooter extremely important. I think the points that everybody
(38:23):
has made are very valuable. There's no reason in the
world to destroy a highly relevant crime scene unless it's
imperative for purposes of some significant new construction.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
Doctor wag Do you are so right because just recently
I went back to the site of the jfk assassination
and it was completely different than anything I had ever
read about or imagined. The grassy knoll, the book depository,
the fence across.
Speaker 2 (38:57):
The knoll, the bridge for many people speculating the second
shot was fired.
Speaker 1 (39:01):
It's completely different than anything I imagined. And when I
say I want a true verdict on this case, I
mean a true verdict. I don't mean a verdict based
on speculation about what the crime scene may have.
Speaker 2 (39:14):
Been or what I thought it was. I mean what
I know the crime scene is.
Speaker 1 (39:19):
I never tried a single case without visiting the crime scene.
I think I hear Chris mcdonne jumping in, and you
mentioned something earlier about acoustics and what could have.
Speaker 2 (39:30):
Been heard next door.
Speaker 1 (39:32):
Well, I think the jury's going to have a question
about what the survivors heard Dylan and Bethany, and I'm
just curious, will that mean an issue at trial which
they could have figured that out if they could have
gone to the scene.
Speaker 10 (39:47):
You know, Nancy, I think it's going to be I
agree with you one hundred percent, because at this point,
you know, the whole purpose of maintaining that crime scene,
as we all know, is at one percent, just that
one percent the ninety nine. Maybe there I either confidence
of the state, et cetera, but it's that one juror
(40:09):
that sits in that jury box and makes the determination
of whether or not they believe the testimony that they're hearing.
There's nothing that can replace the eye, all five senses
being immersed into that crime scene. Did one of the
witnesses hear the stairs creaking when she testifies that Coburger
(40:32):
was coming down the stairs? Did she what did she
look through her door? And if so, what was her
vantage point in terms of visually? What could she she
what could she feel? And it's going to go just
like that, I think in the jury.
Speaker 12 (40:49):
And then you know, to add to that, what about
would the jurorsy a teddy bear on one of the
student's beds and they feel the reality that these were
human beings. The collectors of murderabilia dehumanize the victims. But
also beyond the sixth senses is the humanization of the
young people who live there. As I was saying earlier,
(41:10):
seeing that they may have had a frat party, or
maybe there's a book lying around pertaining to a class
they were taking, or some of their studies, a pair
of sunglasses, a picture of them on a boat. To
picture and feel the victims is a way to emphatically
immerse yourself into what happened to them and who they
were as human beings. And that's quite the opposite of
(41:33):
these rules. As you refer to them that are just
picking away at the scraps of that house. It's to
make these young people real, and you can't do that
by looking at a three D scan or a picture
or blood spatter app evidence.
Speaker 1 (41:46):
Another issue is to Andy Kahn joining us, we have
been told, of course, all the work was done am
it was done under the darkness of the morning hours,
that the remains of that home have been taken and
buried and are being guarded by police. All you have
to do is some search dump locations in Moscow Idaho,
(42:09):
and I've already pulled up one, two, three, four, five, six,
seven eight.
Speaker 2 (42:14):
Okay, So how.
Speaker 1 (42:15):
Hard is that going to be for these ghouls to
locate it and wait for that one moment and get
something of that home.
Speaker 4 (42:24):
There's a will, there's a way just looking anything else.
We've seen prison guards take items from high profile killers.
There was a prison guard, believe it or not, that
got a hold of Jeffrey Dahmer's shaving kit once Dahmer
was killed in prison and then put it.
Speaker 5 (42:40):
Up for sale.
Speaker 4 (42:41):
So there's you know, if you want something bad enough,
you're gonna find a way to get it. And right now,
in this day and age, Coburger is about as big
a name as it gets in the murder billy industry.
And anybody that can get a piece of anything that
he has, any that's associated with him, and especially from
(43:03):
a murder scene, it will be found and it will
end up being sold in the open market.
Speaker 2 (43:08):
We wait as justice unfolds. Goodbye, friend,
Crime Stories with Nancy Grease in the last hours, the
crime scene in Idaho in Moscow, where four beautiful students
were literally slaughtered, most likely.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
In their sleep, has been destroyed.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
That's right, totally demolished or was it? Is there any
speck left behind for scavengers seeking murderabilia?
Speaker 2 (00:42):
Is there anything left for them? And why? Why would
they do that?
Speaker 1 (00:50):
This as the defendant, suspect number one in the quadruple sleigh,
Brian Coburger, makes a last ditch effort to the judge
to have the case thrown out of court.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories.
Speaker 1 (01:06):
Thank you for being with us here at Crime Stories
and on Sirius XM one eleven.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
First of all, take a listen to this.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
It took just ninety minutes time for the infamous home
at eleven twenty two King Road to become nothing more
than a pile of rubble. The debris loaded up by
two contractors, taken to a secret area for disposal. The
site was combed for not a single item to be
left behind for the curious to find and keep as
a souvenir. One local, who wished to remain anonymous, said
(01:33):
they wanted nothing left for the rules to plunder.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Well, I hope that everything you just heard from our
friends at crime online dot com is true. Joining me
an all star panel to make sense of what we
know right now. Joining me in addition to the other
stars on the panel, Andy Kahn, director of Victim Services
and Advocacy Crime Stoppers Houston, who first coined the phrase
(01:57):
murderer Bilia, and Harold Schecter, author of Murderabilia, A History
of Crime in one hundred Objects. You know, a lot
of people would not be interested in that, I, however,
am extremely.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
Interested in that.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
Think about it, A history of crime in one hundred objects,
What objects and why. He is also the author of Maniac,
the Bath School Disaster, and the Birth of modern mass murder. Again,
that's certainly not everyone's cup of tea, however, it is
my cup of tea. You can find him at Haroldshacter
(02:33):
dot com.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
So let's start with them.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
Then I'll circle back to breaking news reporter with the
Washington Examiner, Rachel Schilke, who can tell you everything you
want to know about why the crime scene has been destroyed.
Speaker 2 (02:47):
But first, Andy Kahan joining us. Andy, thank you for
being with us.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
You and Harold both Andy, explain, what is murder rebelia?
And as far as I know, you coined that phrase
and greatly helped me and inspired me and my first
nonfiction book, Objection, where there is an entire chapter devoted
to what I learned from you called blood money Explain.
Speaker 4 (03:14):
Murderabilia is items that are associated with serial killers, mass murderers,
school shooters, high profile killers that are then peddled on
an open market, primarily the innet internet. So these are
items that are produced personally by some of the nation's
(03:34):
worst serial killers and mass murderers.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Let me just break it down because when I was
in your office, they're at Victims Advocacy in Texas.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
I believe you showed me somebody's toenails. Did you show
me somebody's toenails or their hair? What was it you
showed me?
Speaker 1 (03:51):
That was not the most disgusting thing I've ever seen,
but it definitely was in the top ten.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
What was it you showed me, Andy Kahan?
Speaker 4 (03:58):
So inside my duffel bag in my office, I actually
have murderabilia items that include serial killer hair samples, which
is like Charles Manson's hair that was sold in the
form of a swastika. I have actual fingernail clippings from
a California a serial killer. I have pieces of clothing,
(04:20):
I had objects that were actually taken from crime scenes itself.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
What kind of objects taken from crime scenes?
Speaker 1 (04:28):
Because That's what I'm worried about with the demolition of
the King Road address what objects have been taken from
a crime scene? Look, anything is fair game if some
gule gets I don't know, a piece of wood, a
piece of cement, a piece of fabric, a piece of furniture.
Speaker 4 (04:49):
Let me give you an example. Nancy hit me John
Wayne Gacy's cross space.
Speaker 5 (04:54):
There are over forty.
Speaker 4 (04:56):
People that were bidding for items. For dirt that was
scooped up and put into a plastic bag where Gacy
had buried over thirty young men.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Okay, stop right there. Dirt dirt from Jaysey's crawl space
beneath his home, the clown killer. He would lure, molest in,
murder little boys, and then bury the bodies in his
crawl space. People actually paid money for the dirt. How
(05:30):
much money?
Speaker 4 (05:30):
Well, they were paying anywhere from fifty to one hundred
dollars for little bags of dirt.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
Let's go to Harold Scheckter, joining US author of murderabilia,
A history of crime in one hundred objects. Harold, what
is wrong with these people? They're ghules, They're like vampires
sucking the marrow out of a crime scene.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
What is wrong with these people?
Speaker 6 (05:54):
Well, I think it's important to put the phenomenon in
some kind of historical context.
Speaker 5 (06:01):
You know.
Speaker 6 (06:02):
The only thing different now about collecting murder abelia is,
as Andy says, you can do it on the internet.
But the fact remains, if you look at the history
of crime, people have always wanted to own souvenirs connected
to very gruesome and sensational crimes.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Why do you say that, Harold Schachter, what's the oldest
example of murder abilia that you know of?
Speaker 6 (06:30):
Well, you know, back in the let's say seventeen hundreds,
when a condemned murderer was hanged, one of the perks
for the executioner was that he could keep the noose,
and the executioners would cut the nooses into one inch
(06:51):
pieces and sell them to these morbid souvenir hunters. You know,
one of the interesting things. I'm a historian of true crime.
You know, my books examined crimes going back to Shakespeare's time,
and every time there has been a very notorious murder,
(07:12):
people have flocked to the site of the murder and
often torn down, you know, the barns or the houses
where these crimes have taken place. I'll give you an
example in the eighteen seventies. I'm sure you've heard of
the Bender family. The Bender family was his family who
(07:35):
opened a roadside tavern in Kansas in the early eighteen seventies,
and when travelers, you know, weary travelers, would stay there,
the venders would murder them and take all their possessions
and bury their corpses in the apple orchard. When their
crimes were discovered, hundreds and hundreds of people descended on
(08:00):
the vendor property and basically tore down the house, you know,
coming away with these souvenirs. It's not a new phenomenon.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
No, it's really not. You're right to bring up the
Bender family. Guys. This is happening now, and I'm.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
Going to go to our legal expert to discuss what
does this mean legally if and when this case ever
goes to trial that there is no more crime scene
to visit. But first I want you to take a
listen to our forensic crime online.
Speaker 7 (08:29):
The clopboard house located at one one two two King Road,
has been torn down, with the entire front of the
building out of sight in roughly fifteen minutes. According to
school officials, demolition was set for during the school's winter break,
when fewer students would be in the area. The home, however,
has been digitized into a three D model using the
latest technology, and according to the prosecution and defense, the
(08:52):
actual building will serve no purpose in the upcoming trial.
So with all legal sides and agreement, the home that
was donated by its owner to the University of Idaho
has been raised.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Interesting that we hear from crime Online and the legal
parties that they're fine with the destruction of the home,
but in my mind, those most connected to this case disagree.
Take a listen to our cut seven to eleven from
Crime Stories.
Speaker 8 (09:20):
The families of the four students killed in the house
on King Road were not in agreement on the demolition.
The Gonzavez and Cronodle families issued a statement before the
demolition asking the university to wait to tear down the
building until Coberger's trial is completed. The Gonzavez family released
a statement through their attorneys saying the house has evidentiary
and emotional value. In the statement, Gonzavez wrote, quote, the
(09:42):
family has stressed tirelessly to the prosecution and the University
of Idaho the importance evidentiary and emotionally that the King
Road House carries, But nobody seems to carry enough. She writes,
the family's opinion isn't a priority. The family of Ethan Chapin,
who did not live there, offered support of the demolition.
In their statement that Chapins said the demolition was needed
(10:04):
quote for the good of the university, it's students, including
our kids, and the community of Moscow.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
This is what I think about that. I think that.
Speaker 1 (10:14):
There's a very strong possibility the jury would not have
seen the crime scene. Seeing the crime scene is very rare.
We only hear about it in high profile cases when
it does happen. Typically it does not happen. However, better
safe than sorry. I think rushing into the demolition of
the quadruple homicide was wrong at this juncture. That said,
(10:40):
I want to hear about this so called secret location,
and I want to hear about the destruction of the home,
and will circle back to the gules that are absolutely
trying to get memorabilia from the King Roade Home, no
question about that. Time stories with Nancy Grace joining me,
(11:13):
Rachel show Key along with the rest of our experts
breaking these Reporter Washington Examiner, Rachel, thank you for being
with us. Tell me about the destruction of the crime, Sayne, Well, the.
Speaker 9 (11:24):
House was originally supposed to be demolished in August, but
they delayed it because they were going through this court
process of deciding whether or not they were going to
keep the home standing or not. And then eventually the
home was destroyed over the student's winter break. The university
officials wanted to minimize any emotional damage that could do
on the students, and as we heard in those clips,
(11:45):
a lot of the family members were not okay with this.
They said that there could be evidentiary value, that this
could be very important if there was a jury that
could eventually see the home, or at least just to
have it there in case the evidence needs to be
put forward in court. So definitely was not the majority
opinion of most of the people involved.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
Where is you so called secret location where the timbers
and the scaffold everything went.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
Where is the secret location?
Speaker 4 (12:14):
Now?
Speaker 9 (12:15):
I'm actually not sure where that secret location.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
Is well, it won't take long to find out.
Speaker 1 (12:20):
Joining me again, high profile experts on the case. Chris
mcdunna joining me, who has visited the scene many many times,
Director at the Cold Case Foundation, former homicide detective, over
three hundred homicides under his belt, and host of a
YouTube channel where I found him the interview room. Chris mcdotta,
(12:41):
what do you think as a homicide detective, what do
you think, Antie?
Speaker 10 (12:45):
I think in one of these cases, in a case
like this, this is a huge mistake. This is just
my personal opinion. Is the fact that that building has
now gone I think the biggest problem. The State's going
to have digital and all of the other forensic stuff
that they've collected, that's not an issue, but the acoustics
(13:07):
of that home are going to play very important roles.
And the reason for that is within fifty feet of
that house, there is a video camera that allegedly picked
up moaning or something to that effect, and it's in
the affidavit. Now, if they didn't have an acoustic engineer
go in there and measure, then they've got a real problem.
(13:32):
And the other problem I see is early on with
the university, it sounded like, was you know, pushing this
destruction of this house. They said that both the defense
and the prosecution and sign off that's not a problem.
They'd stipulate it to that this is your lane, you
know more than anybody on this channel about you know
(13:53):
what we're talking about there. However, in this particular case,
the FBI returned later on after the civilian company that
was in there to clean the house shop, the FBI
returns to take digital, you know, a digital footprint. So
(14:14):
if I was a defense immediately, I would file motions
that that is uh, you know, painted evidence that they
collected because there's video of this company, the company that
was going to tear it down, walking in and out
of that house multiple times. And now the FBI shows
(14:35):
up just before it's going to be torn down, and
they decide to collect additional evidence.
Speaker 2 (14:40):
After it's being cleaned, right Chris mcdonna.
Speaker 10 (14:42):
Absolutely, And and so what evidence that that evidence will
never come in?
Speaker 11 (14:47):
Right?
Speaker 10 (14:47):
And it's I mean you you would fight forever if
you were the defense attorney to keep that evidence.
Speaker 1 (14:52):
If I were the prosecutor, I would not have wont
it torn down? Chris mcdonna absolutely, not yet, maybe one day,
of course, but not yet. I don't know why we
could not wait till after the trial. Now joining me
high profile lawyer out of the Jacksonville jurisdiction, former FBI agent,
former cop Miami Dade. Never lack of business. They're an
(15:14):
author of arrest proof yourself. You can find him at
Dale Carson Law dot com.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
Dale.
Speaker 1 (15:19):
I got a lot of prophesy tearing down the house,
and I want to go back to our murderabilia experts,
Andy Kahan and Harold Schechter. But Dale Carson, this doesn't
mean a hill of beans if when we hear both
sides agree, okay, Why because if it's a mistake that
they got rid of the house, the defense can use
(15:39):
that later if there is a conviction, there could be
a claim on appeal of an effective assistance of counsel
by that defense lawyer agreeing to the demolition. I mean,
is nobody thinking that a word appeal? You don't want
to win the case for it to be reversed on
a hill. I just think that we made a mad
(16:03):
dash to tear the house down, and for what right.
Speaker 5 (16:06):
There's no person turning it down. I've been to Thouance
of crime scene over my life, and I can simply
tell you that the destruction of the primary piece of
evidence is insane. That house gives you perspective, It gives
you a great many other vantage points.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Odell.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Just right there after, I watched Chris McDonough do his
drive through all over the town, all of the very
narrow roads, the streets, very narrow streets. I don't really
know that two cars can pass each other, especially in
that weather when it's snowing and the roads are icy,
(16:47):
and the hill that the house is up on a hill.
What I'm saying is the layout of the home and
seeing the home, as you're just saying, is so much
different than a picture. So when I saw Chris McDonough
driving through taking a video at about literally two miles
an hour, maybe I knew I had to go if
(17:10):
I were going to.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
Talk about this case knowledgeably. And when I got.
Speaker 1 (17:16):
There, as you're saying, deal Carson, it's so much different
than the photos depict. When I went up that hill
and went around the house to the back of the house,
it's three stories perched up there. I can just see
Coburger right now. I can just see him up there
(17:37):
in the dark looking down into that home.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
I mean you could throw a softball to it from
the vantage point.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
There was only a thin line of trees between the
house and where I was parked. I went there in
the morning, I went there in the afternoon, I went
there in the evening, and I went there in the
dead of night, after midnight to look down at the
house because somebody left a light on there.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Light in their deal.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
Carson completely different than it looks in the pictures.
Speaker 5 (18:04):
Dale, And of course you could see directly in where
the women would be during the they're living there.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
Dale.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
I can even look into the home across the street
and tell you the name of the dishwashing liquid sitting
at the kitchen counter.
Speaker 5 (18:19):
That's incredible.
Speaker 2 (18:20):
That's how easy, how tight the space is.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
So what you're saying about a picture cannot explain it fully.
Speaker 5 (18:29):
No, that's power and dury. It's probably better for the
defense that it is gone from that perspective.
Speaker 2 (18:35):
Oh yeah, was that you Chris McDonald jumping in.
Speaker 10 (18:38):
So to your point, Nancy, the other thing that I
think is being overlooked here is the fact that one
of the search warrants we forget was to a company
called Extreme Networks. There was a search warrant filed on
January twenty fifth, twenty three and in that they're looking
for intrusion network intrusion into that residence. There was a
(19:04):
the one of the affiants, there is a detective by
the name of Neil er Errig. He now works for
the Secret Service and his expertise is network intrusion. Well,
whose laptop are they looking for? If we read that
search one, it says description or decrypted access to the
(19:24):
following computer Extreme network service tags Kaylee. They're looking for
network intrusion into Kaylee's computer.
Speaker 1 (19:35):
Can you a place stop talking like that? Network intrusion?
Are you saying somebody who's trying to hack Kale Gonsolvis's computer?
Speaker 2 (19:44):
Is that what you're saying?
Speaker 10 (19:45):
Yes, and I would submit to you it's whoever. If
it's BK, he's sitting in the back of that house
to your point, looking through those windows and tapping into
the network in that home.
Speaker 2 (19:59):
Once again, can you totally freaked me out?
Speaker 1 (20:01):
Chris mcdona doctor Cyril weck joining US renowned forensic pathologists,
medical legal consultant, author of so many books, including the
Life and Deaths of Cyril weckt Memoirs of America's most
controversial forensic pathologists. I would be inclined to agree with that,
(20:22):
Doctor Weck. Thank you for being with us. You've seen
so many many crime scenes and performed so many many autopsies.
What evidence, Doctor Wect could have been left behind.
Speaker 11 (20:37):
In the case of John O. Kennedy. All the statements
that your guests have made are extremely applicable and extremely reverant.
They're talking about taking down the Texas Schoolbook Repository building
and even maybe reconstructed the grassal area where us the
(21:03):
most critics believe additional shots were fired. So I strongly
believe and without repeating, everything that the gentlemen and lady
have made are extremely important. I concur fully and strongly
agree that there is no needs, no rush, no purpose,
(21:27):
and tearing down the critical physical site associated with those
particular mergers.
Speaker 1 (21:34):
I agree with you, Doctor wit and for all I know,
the jury may not be allowed to visit, they may
not even want to visit, which I doubt. I'm sure
they'll want to visit it. But now that opportunity is
forever gone, it cannot.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Be sumpty dupty. You can't put it back together again.
Why they did it? I don't know. I'm not saying
never do it. I'm not saying don't do it before
the trial.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Back to Harold Schechter and Andy Kahn, and then we're
going to highly recognize psychoanalysts joining us out of Beverly Hills,
Doctor Bethany Marshall. Back to you, Andy Cohn. I understand it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Rachel Shilkey. I understand that
all of the lumber, all of the foundation, everything, the bookshelves,
(22:23):
the whatever, the kitchen, the bathroom, articles, everything was raised early.
Speaker 2 (22:30):
In the morning by eight a m. Under the cover
of darkness.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
The Clapbird House at eleven twenty two King Road in
Moscow was gone after just ninety minutes. I understand that
everything was taken, Rachel Shilkey.
Speaker 2 (22:45):
Is this correct? And buried in an undisclosed location? Is
that true? Rachel?
Speaker 9 (22:51):
That's what a lot of the reports are saying. It
obviously has not been officially confirmed, but it is possible
that all of those materials are still with us. We
just are not sure where they are at this moment.
Speaker 1 (23:03):
Andy Kahan, So your experience that these ghuls, they are
akin to grave robbers. They'll stop at nothing to get
a piece of this house.
Speaker 4 (23:13):
No, and there's actually precdent for this, but the key
distinguishing piece on the two other homes that were raised
in Ohio, one which was Ariel Castro that you might
remember was the one that kidnapped and sexually tortured three
young women for over a decade and kept him in
his house.
Speaker 10 (23:32):
Part of his plea.
Speaker 4 (23:33):
Deal was again after he was convicted, that his house
would be raised and torn down so that nobody could
get a quote, a piece of a prize that could
be sold.
Speaker 5 (23:46):
Ohio did the same.
Speaker 4 (23:47):
Thing with Anthony Soell, a serial killer that murdered eleven
women at that time, after he was convicted keyword after convicted,
they raised his house again. So I get why they
would want to do this, but I agree with you
and some of your other panelists that there's no real
(24:08):
sense of urgency right now. But trust me, this is
just going to be the beginning and the merchandising of
Brian Coberger because when he actually does get convicted and
gets in the Idaho penitentiary, the murder billy dealers are
going to come after him and Droves because he's a
treasure trove for profiting for them.
Speaker 12 (24:28):
Dancy if I could interrupt just for a second about
a very good reason to keep the house instead of
having torn it down. Sure, you know, there's nothing like
walking into a space and feeling what happens there. Like history.
It's one thing to like assumb through a book and
look at wars and you know young people that were
killed in wars. It's another thing to stand on a
(24:50):
hilly knoll or a war field and say, young people
died here.
Speaker 1 (24:53):
Harold Schancktery joining us, author of Murderabilia, A History of
Crime in one hundred Objects, Harold Dictor, what do you
believe that these ghouls would try to get from the house?
Speaker 6 (25:06):
Well, I mean, you know, any little object connected with
it immediately achieves again this kind of ghoulish value or
murder abelia collectors. You know, in the past, I wrote
a book, for example, about a mass murderer named Anton
Propes back in the eighteen sixties who butchered an entire family.
(25:29):
He lured each member one by one into the barn
and then slaughtered them with an axe. And again, when
those crimes were uncovered and these hordes of people descended
on the site, they you know, ripped up the floorboards
of the you know of the of the barn and
the ones that you know, the pieces that had particular
(25:52):
value to them were ones that had bloodstains on them.
So again that illustrates two things. One, you know, this
is not something new. I think one of the important
things that it's important to consider is why we are
so drawn to and fascinated, you know, by these lurid, sensational,
(26:15):
horrific crimes.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
To begin with, Carol Schackter, I wondered that for many
many years. I don't know the answer to that, and
I'm just a jd. Okay, we need to shrink. You're right, Schackter.
Let's go straight to doctor Bethany Marshall renounce psycho Anas
joining us out of the Beverly Hills jurisdiction. Bethany, what
is wrong with these people? Did you hear what Scheckter said?
(26:38):
And I want to hear from Andy Kahn as well.
Speaker 2 (26:41):
The floor board would.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
Have more value, And I actually feel like I'm eating
a dirt sandwich right now.
Speaker 2 (26:48):
I want to just clean my tongue off.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
The floorboard would have more value if there was blood
on it.
Speaker 2 (26:55):
Sidney, please give me the tea.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
I think I need something a little stronger than tea
right now, But how could that be? Thank you, It's
got more value and these victim's blood. You know what,
I just had a flashback. My flashback is this doctor Bethany.
When I had to testify at my fiancee Keith's murder trial.
(27:17):
I remember coming down the witness.
Speaker 2 (27:20):
Seat was height up.
Speaker 1 (27:22):
I had to go up two flights of stairs to
get to it.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
It was equal to the judge up on his bench.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
And when I came down, I passed the state's table
and Keith's bloody denim shirt was there. I'm just trying
to get my head wrapped around who would want to
buy a bloody floorboard and what Schacter or Harold Schacter
told me. And I'm pretty sure Andy co is going
to agree that that floorboard or that mattress or that
(27:57):
bed sheet would fetch more money on the internet if
the victims of blood was on it.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Who are these people.
Speaker 12 (28:05):
You know, Nancy, I have to believe that these collectors
of this murderabilia present panel excluded, of course, are taking
some secret delight in the pain and suffering of the victims,
just like a murder or status takes delight in the
suffering of the victims. So do these collectors, you know, Nancy,
(28:26):
People feel that just because somebody is famous, they must
be fascinating. So like a BTK killer or a Casey Anthony,
just because we know a lot about them and they
are talked about on the air, or these people must
be fascinating, I want a piece of them. But the
fact is, criminals, murderers, perpetrators, they are incredibly boring people.
(28:51):
Have you ever sat and interviewed one, I'm sure you have.
You know, the crimes may be very notorious and sort
of horrible and hard to wrap one's mind around. But
when you sit with a criminal, their excitement is not
in the conversation with you, or about their travels, or
their children or the latest books they've read. They're so
(29:11):
preoccupied with their internal, sexualized, fetishized world of wanting to
kill people that they're not even present in the room
with you. So I think the public should not confuse
these criminals and their acts as being fascinating in any way.
And the fact is, when you have a floorboard with
(29:33):
blood on it in your home, you yourself become proxy
to the crime. I know that's a dramatic statement, not
in reality, it's not like you could be prosecuted for it.
But you are delighting in the anguish of the victims.
You are ignoring what their families have gone through, and
(29:53):
you have a whole imagination about what happened that has
nothing to do with reality.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
Time stories with Nancy Greece, Andy Kahn, you had to
buy your toenail and hair Stash can't believe I went
to law school three years at Mercery University and it
took me two years at NYU to get an l
and criminal and constitutional law And I'm saying your toenail Stash.
Speaker 2 (30:33):
I never thought those words would come out of my mouth,
but they did. You had to get it from somewhere.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
What freaks are dealing in a killer's toenails? And I
agree and disagree with Dr Bethany Marshall. I think some
people want a piece of these victims. They want the
bloody bed sheets, they want the bloody floorboard, and can
you and made the pain Andy con of the victims' families.
(31:05):
I mean, I'm sitting here right now wondering for the
first time because I really don't like to think about it,
and I try to avoid thinking about it. What happened
to Keith bloody shirt.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
Where is it? Did they destroy it?
Speaker 1 (31:16):
Is it in a plastic bag somewhere in an evidence room?
Speaker 2 (31:20):
I mean, can you imagine?
Speaker 1 (31:23):
And Andy, do you really think these ghules are gonna
give up? They're going to find where the home remains
were buried. They're going to find it, and they're going
to try and get it. But back to my original question,
who are these people? You had to buy those toenails somewhere?
Speaker 2 (31:44):
From who you know?
Speaker 4 (31:45):
From a victim's perspective, and as someone who's worked with
homicide survivors for over thirty years, there's absolutely nothing more
nauseating and discussing when you find out the person who
murdered one of your loved ones now has items being
hawked by third party dealers simply for pure profits. Like
(32:05):
it or not, you have small groups of people out here,
for whatever reason, idolized serial killers, mass murderers, high profile killers,
and they want to own a piece of their soul.
Speaker 10 (32:18):
And this is a untapped.
Speaker 4 (32:20):
Market that they've realized that not only can they own
a piece of whatever they have, they can also make
money off of it. So you have about seven dealers
throughout the country that specialized in obtaining items from high
profile killers strictly for the purpose of profiting, and anything
(32:41):
that you can get that has something associated with the victim.
Because I have actually seen items that were actually used
to kill their victims being sold at an open market.
That is like the ultimate get. It's like a treasure hunt,
and nothing is going to stop them from trying to
(33:02):
obtain items from the Idaho killer.
Speaker 2 (33:05):
Stop plays.
Speaker 1 (33:06):
I've got to go to Dale Carson on something. Dale,
do you ever, I mean, you and I have tried
a lot of cases. Everybody on this panel has dealt
with a lot of similar cases. Well, not similar to Idaho,
because that's quadruple murder, but murder cases. Dale, do you
ever just get sick to your stomach because everything Andy
(33:28):
con just said, Harold Schechter, doctor Cyril Wicked, everything they
said is correct, But something about, Hey, what about this?
Do you remember in the Bible how the Roman soldiers
gambled to try to get Christ's robe and his crown.
Speaker 2 (33:53):
Of thorns all that was left and took it somewhere.
I mean as far as I can. I mean, thinking
all the way back in history, how callous and awful
that is.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
Dale, Just thinking of someone trying to get remnants of
this home, and the more gory and the closer that
remnant was to one of the victims, the more valuable
it would be. Do you ever just want to quit
Dale Carson when you hear things like that.
Speaker 5 (34:24):
Oh, absolutely, you've missed one ceiling point. It's the smell
of a recent crime sheet, and it's pubbling because the
lines are lost basically no reason at all. Yes, all
the material wealth that they have gathered all these years
is of no meaning this one, right?
Speaker 2 (34:47):
Is this Harold?
Speaker 5 (34:47):
Or yeah?
Speaker 6 (34:48):
This is Harold? Can I just interject from ways?
Speaker 2 (34:51):
Yes?
Speaker 6 (34:51):
I mean, one word that we haven't been using so
far in this discussion is evil. And you know, evil
exerts its own very dark fascination often in the newspaper
articles that I've read, when reporters have seen these crowds
of morbid curiosity seekers descend on these places and come
(35:16):
away with bloody splinters and so on, they talk about
them as relics, And you know, there's a kind of
they're almost the flip side, the dark side, the shadow
side of saints relics. You know, Saints relics contains something
of the holy and the sacred, a lot of the murderabilia.
(35:36):
And again this is you know, not that these people
are conscious of it, but they're little objects you know
that you know that sort of resonate with the power
of evil, and there's something about you know, there's a
dark attraction to that for whatever reason. I mean our
you know, perhaps the psychoanalyst on our panel, whose name unfortunately.
Speaker 1 (35:59):
For doctor Bethany Marshall. Hey, let's follow up on what
Schechter is saying. You're hearing Harold Secter, author of murder Abelia.
What about it, doctor Bethany.
Speaker 13 (36:08):
Well, I think it is an aspect of evil. I
think that because it's not just like othering where you
know that somebody suffered but you're kind of callous to
it and you don't really care.
Speaker 12 (36:19):
This is at a whole other level. This is actually
taking delight in somebody suffering. That's really very different. It's
having the bloody shirt or the bloody floorboard and looking
at it and saying, aha, I have something, and you
are right. I have something of the victim. I have
something of the crime. I am inserting myself into the
(36:40):
notoriety of this case, and I feel important because of it.
It's really, you know, in one drop of blood is
an entire world of English and hurt, the English of
the families, the English of the victim, the English of
the community. That the reverberating effect of the crime, and
these people are clutching this one little relic and.
Speaker 13 (37:02):
They are happy.
Speaker 12 (37:03):
How different is that, Nancy than the perpetrator who acts out.
I mean, there's a difference between impulse and action. These
people are thinking the perpetrator is doing, but they're thinking
the same thing the perpetrators thinking. They're just not acting
out on it.
Speaker 1 (37:18):
Doctor Cerial Weck joining me, renowned pathologists who has seen
so many high profile autopsies, performed them and been to
so many crime scenes. Doctor wecked, in your opinion, what
could have benefited this jury had they been able to
go to the crime scene.
Speaker 11 (37:39):
I believe it would have been highly relevant for them
who have gone to the crime scene and two have
specifically visualized themselves from the sixth floor southeast core a
window where they claim as well did the shooting, and
then to replace themselves downstairs where the shots who were
(38:02):
heard and see whether it fits in with the audio
and with the video evidence. And also to have gone
then to the grassy ole area, a short distance away
where they claim where the critics claim there was a
second shooter extremely important. I think the points that everybody
(38:23):
has made are very valuable. There's no reason in the
world to destroy a highly relevant crime scene unless it's
imperative for purposes of some significant new construction.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
Doctor wag Do you are so right because just recently
I went back to the site of the jfk assassination
and it was completely different than anything I had ever
read about or imagined. The grassy knoll, the book depository,
the fence across.
Speaker 2 (38:57):
The knoll, the bridge for many people speculating the second
shot was fired.
Speaker 1 (39:01):
It's completely different than anything I imagined. And when I
say I want a true verdict on this case, I
mean a true verdict. I don't mean a verdict based
on speculation about what the crime scene may have.
Speaker 2 (39:14):
Been or what I thought it was. I mean what
I know the crime scene is.
Speaker 1 (39:19):
I never tried a single case without visiting the crime scene.
I think I hear Chris mcdonne jumping in, and you
mentioned something earlier about acoustics and what could have.
Speaker 2 (39:30):
Been heard next door.
Speaker 1 (39:32):
Well, I think the jury's going to have a question
about what the survivors heard Dylan and Bethany, and I'm
just curious, will that mean an issue at trial which
they could have figured that out if they could have
gone to the scene.
Speaker 10 (39:47):
You know, Nancy, I think it's going to be I
agree with you one hundred percent, because at this point,
you know, the whole purpose of maintaining that crime scene,
as we all know, is at one percent, just that
one percent the ninety nine. Maybe there I either confidence
of the state, et cetera, but it's that one juror
(40:09):
that sits in that jury box and makes the determination
of whether or not they believe the testimony that they're hearing.
There's nothing that can replace the eye, all five senses
being immersed into that crime scene. Did one of the
witnesses hear the stairs creaking when she testifies that Coburger
(40:32):
was coming down the stairs? Did she what did she
look through her door? And if so, what was her
vantage point in terms of visually? What could she she
what could she feel? And it's going to go just
like that, I think in the jury.
Speaker 12 (40:49):
And then you know, to add to that, what about
would the jurorsy a teddy bear on one of the
student's beds and they feel the reality that these were
human beings. The collectors of murderabilia dehumanize the victims. But
also beyond the sixth senses is the humanization of the
young people who live there. As I was saying earlier,
(41:10):
seeing that they may have had a frat party, or
maybe there's a book lying around pertaining to a class
they were taking, or some of their studies, a pair
of sunglasses, a picture of them on a boat. To
picture and feel the victims is a way to emphatically
immerse yourself into what happened to them and who they
were as human beings. And that's quite the opposite of
(41:33):
these rules. As you refer to them that are just
picking away at the scraps of that house. It's to
make these young people real, and you can't do that
by looking at a three D scan or a picture
or blood spatter app evidence.
Speaker 1 (41:46):
Another issue is to Andy Kahn joining us, we have
been told, of course, all the work was done am
it was done under the darkness of the morning hours,
that the remains of that home have been taken and
buried and are being guarded by police. All you have
to do is some search dump locations in Moscow Idaho,
(42:09):
and I've already pulled up one, two, three, four, five, six,
seven eight.
Speaker 2 (42:14):
Okay, So how.
Speaker 1 (42:15):
Hard is that going to be for these ghouls to
locate it and wait for that one moment and get
something of that home.
Speaker 4 (42:24):
There's a will, there's a way just looking anything else.
We've seen prison guards take items from high profile killers.
There was a prison guard, believe it or not, that
got a hold of Jeffrey Dahmer's shaving kit once Dahmer
was killed in prison and then put it.
Speaker 5 (42:40):
Up for sale.
Speaker 4 (42:41):
So there's you know, if you want something bad enough,
you're gonna find a way to get it. And right now,
in this day and age, Coburger is about as big
a name as it gets in the murder billy industry.
And anybody that can get a piece of anything that
he has, any that's associated with him, and especially from
(43:03):
a murder scene, it will be found and it will
end up being sold in the open market.
Speaker 2 (43:08):
We wait as justice unfolds. Goodbye, friend,
Host
Nancy Grace
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.