August 30, 2023 • 31 mins
Police say they have arrested the University of Idaho killer, but how concrete is the case against Bryan Kohberger? Are investigators overlooking information that could prove Kohberger’s innocence?
Check us out online:
www.tiktok.com/@officialktstudios
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 (00:04):
The medic house to brutally stabbing four University of Idaho
students to death.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Appears in court.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
Coberger is accused of murdering University of Idaho students Kailee Gonzalvez,
Madison Mogan, Zena Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin.
Speaker 4 (00:24):
This is the Idaho Massacre, a production of KT Studios
and iHeartRadio, episode four cracks in the narrative, I'm Courtney Armstrong,
a television producer at KAT Studios, with Stephanie Leidecker, Jeff Shane,
and Connor Powell. After being arrested in Pennsylvania, an extradited
(00:49):
twenty eight year old Brian Coberger is in prison awaiting
trial for the murders of four University of Idaho students.
Six months after police say the former PhD criminology student
committed the brutal murders. Coberger appeared in an Idaho courtroom.
The families of several of the victims watched the arraignment
(01:11):
hearing from the gallery. After a brief glance toward the families,
Coburger kept his head and eyes looking forward.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Day.
Speaker 5 (01:20):
We are now on record in a state of Idaho
versus banger with.
Speaker 4 (01:27):
His feet shackled and wearing an orange prison outfit. Coburger
listened as the judge read the charges against him and
explained that a conviction carried a penalty of life in
prison or death.
Speaker 5 (01:39):
Miss Taylor as mister Coberger prepared to plead to these charges.
Speaker 4 (01:44):
When the judge asked Coburger's attorney if he was ready
to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty, Attorney
Ann Taylor declined. The judge then entered a plea on
behalf of Brian Coburger.
Speaker 5 (01:58):
Because Coberger is standing silent, I'm going to answer that
guilty police each charge.
Speaker 4 (02:07):
The judge then set a trial date for October second.
Speaker 6 (02:11):
Brian was very shocked by his arrest.
Speaker 4 (02:14):
While investigators believe they have their man, the case against
Brian Cobeger is far from airtight.
Speaker 6 (02:21):
Eager to be exonerated was the language he used as
he was asserting innocence.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
It's important to note that Brian Cobeger has not been
found guilty of any crimes. Monroe County public defender Jason
Lebar represented Coburger in Pennsylvania after his arrest. Lebar is
no longer working for Coburger, but has been a regular
on TV and in the media, pushing back on the
official police narrative.
Speaker 6 (02:47):
It's a strong circumstantial case, but the evidence, when it
is viewed individually, you can attack that evidence as a
defense attorney.
Speaker 4 (02:57):
Here's Stephanie and Jeff.
Speaker 7 (03:00):
So at this point, officials are in the very early
stages of laying out their case against the alleged killer,
Brian Coburger.
Speaker 8 (03:07):
Yeah, all that's been released is this nineteen page probable
cause AFFIDAVID. A probable cause affidavid is a summary of
the evidence and circumstances of the arrest. It's usually written
by the arresting officer and given to a judge for
a review.
Speaker 7 (03:19):
And within these nineteen pages we learned a lot about
the night of the massacre and how police zeroed in
on Coburger specifically.
Speaker 8 (03:27):
A lot of the evidence at this stage is merely circumstantial. Now,
for listeners who don't know or need a reminder, circumstantial
evidence is evidence of facts that the court can draw
conclusions from. So in this case, the fact that we
know Coburger's cell phone pinged off of towers near the
scene of the crime points to the idea that he
may have been around the area when these murders were committed,
and when you put all of that together, it paints
(03:48):
a pretty damning picture, but it's not direct evidence like
DNA or being in possession of the murder weapon. We
need to remember that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty,
and as Coburger's first attorney pointed out, the best way
for any defense to attack the prosecution is to remind
the jury that everything the prosecution has is circumstantial, because
at the end of the day, all the defense needs
(04:08):
to do is find one jury member who has doubts
about the case.
Speaker 7 (04:12):
And it's also important to note that likely investigators have
more evidence than their sharing at this point. In the
immediate aftermath of the brutal murders, Moscow police said the
two surviving roommates, Dylan Mortensen and Bethany Funk, were home
during the murders, but they did not wake up until
later in the morning. That information was part of every
(04:35):
timeline until December twentieth, when Moscow pdeve removed it. Ten
days later, when Brian Coberger was arrested, police stated in
the probable cause Affidavid that Dylan was not only awake,
but had seen the attacker.
Speaker 3 (04:52):
This time, she saw a dark figure standing there in
black clothing, wearing a mask that covered that person's mouth.
She remembered that person being about five foot ten, not
very muscular, but with an athletic build. She also remembered
seeing bushy eyebrows.
Speaker 4 (05:07):
Here again, Jeff and Stephanie.
Speaker 8 (05:11):
Regardless of what Dylan may or may not have seen,
she and Bethany are both victims and all this. They
lived through a serious trauma, They lost their friends, and
have been skewered by the media.
Speaker 4 (05:21):
It's just not right.
Speaker 7 (05:23):
The prosecution may be sympathetic to that, but they also
have a case to close, and Dylan is the big
star witness, and the question is, though, is sheer reliable.
Speaker 3 (05:32):
One terrified she remained frozen in place as the suspect
walked past her and left out the sliding glass door
behind her.
Speaker 8 (05:40):
There are some things we know based on the probable
cause effidavit. We know that Dylan was quote unquote frozen
in fear, that she heard some sort of cries from
her roommates, and she saw a masked man who was
slender but not muscular, with bushy eyebrows.
Speaker 7 (05:53):
Dylan's description definitely offers something, but again, it doesn't really
link Brian Coberger to the murder, not very muscular, having
bushy eyebrows that could describe a lot of people. She
also made no mention of skin color or hair color.
Speaker 8 (06:09):
While at first the information dell And provided seemed to
point the finger at Coburger, upon closer look at actually
might be more helpful for the defense because this vague
description could cause reasonable doubt amongst dury members.
Speaker 7 (06:21):
Detectives announced that they are interested in talking to the
person or people in a white twenty eleven to twenty
thirteen Hondai Elektra.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
The first piece of evidence that appears to connect Brian
Koberger to the crime is his white Hondai Alantra.
Speaker 8 (06:40):
It may be a big break in the case.
Speaker 7 (06:42):
A grainy image of a speeding car that could be
the white Hondai Alantra police are looking for.
Speaker 4 (06:51):
According to the probable Cause Affidavid, multiple security cameras caught
a white Alantra driving past the home on King Road
within minutes around the murders. Coburger's first defense attorney, Jason
Lebar points out that white Olanchas are common cars and
Coburger is just one of many owners of the four
door Sedan.
Speaker 6 (07:10):
The white A Lantra can't be determined to be his
white Alantra. I mean, there's circumstantial evidence indicating that it
could potentially be his white A Launcher, but there's certainly
not direct evidence.
Speaker 4 (07:24):
Again, Jeff and Stephanie.
Speaker 8 (07:27):
We know that within days of the murders, police told
the wider community to be on the lookout for a
white Hyundai Elantra.
Speaker 7 (07:32):
As a result, the officer at WSU found this exact
type of car registered to Brian Coburger.
Speaker 8 (07:39):
Police also checked his records and noted that Coburger had
changed his registration from Pennsylvania to Washington State on November eighteenth,
which was just days after the murder.
Speaker 6 (07:49):
They don't have direct evidence that he's driving the white Alantra.
Speaker 8 (07:52):
Here's the problem. Police haven't provided any evidence that Coburger
was actually driving the car speeding past the house on
King Road as of this moment. There's no highway or
red light camera photos, nothing.
Speaker 4 (08:03):
That we know of.
Speaker 7 (08:04):
And keep in mind, at this point we may not
have all the information that the police does.
Speaker 8 (08:08):
That's true, and we also don't know what they found
in the car. According to experts we talked to, if
this was Coburger's car and he really did kill four
people and then get in and drive away, it's likely that,
no matter how well he scrubbed and cleaned, there would
be some sort of DNA evidence in that car from
the night in question.
Speaker 7 (08:24):
And I think it's worth noting that DNA can take
weeks to process, and at the time of his arrest,
investigators didn't have access to his car.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
However, now weeks later they do. A key part of
the prosecution of Brian Coburger will be putting him at
the scene of the crime. Police also need to place
Brian Coberger behind the wheel of the suspected vehicle in
the probable cause AFFIDAVID Investigators rely on historical cell side
(08:55):
data to make this connection. Here again Jeff and Stephanie.
Speaker 7 (09:00):
So in an effort to track Coburger, police really had
to rely on cell phone towers and to see where
Coburger's cell phone was pinging from A.
Speaker 8 (09:10):
Cell phone pang is the act of determining the estimated
current location of a cell phone. This may be accomplished
via GPS data or by using cell phone tower triangulation, which,
as we know in this case, is what they used.
Speaker 7 (09:21):
Police were able to get a search warrant for Coburger's
cell phone records because he had been pulled over for
a traffic violation prior and he gave police his cell
phone number. Upon reviewing the records, police determined that Coburger's
phone was connecting to towers in Moscow around that time,
and that his movements were very similar to what the
(09:42):
alleged killer was doing at that time.
Speaker 8 (09:45):
And so I think what we surmise from this is
that we are all glued to our phones. I'm here's
my in my hand right now. So it stands to
reason that of Coburger was in the car that night,
so was his phone. However, it should be noted that
locating a mobile phone based on a single Stete cell
phone tower places the phone in a broad area, but
it cannot actually pinpoint the exact location. So it's not
(10:05):
like this is one hundred percent reliable science.
Speaker 4 (10:08):
Cell Phones are intimate devices. Their data knows a lot
about us. If Coburger's phone was in his car, then
he was likely in his car. Once police began to
hone in on Brian Coburger, they began looking at his
movements around the time of the murders. He had given
his cell phone number to a deputy during a previous
traffic stop, so police got a search warrant for his
(10:29):
cell phone records. A police review determined Coburger's phone was
connecting to towers in the Moscow area and were similar
to the movements of the suspected white Atlantra investigators believed
was the murder vehicle. But cell phone pings on a
tower are not precise GPS location coordinates.
Speaker 6 (10:47):
If it was GPS location cordinates, you're talking down to
a meter as to where Brian Coburger was at the
time of these crimes, Whereas a cell phone tower ping
is that you're within a radius of that tower up
to twenty miles. And obviously mister Coburger lived within ten
miles of the University of Idaho where these crimes were committed,
(11:07):
so certainly he could ping at any moment in time
near the actual crime.
Speaker 7 (11:12):
The night of the murders, Coburger's phone was tracked heading
to Moscow before the attack, but his phone was off
from two forty seven am to four forty eight AM.
Speaker 8 (11:23):
So what you're saying is that this looks like what
he's trying to conceal his location for these approximately two hours.
Speaker 7 (11:28):
Coburger's former attorney said, just because Coburger's phone pings at
a tower doesn't mean much considering the short distance between Pullman, Washington,
where Coburger lived, and Moscow, where the victims were murdered.
Speaker 8 (11:42):
Right because the phone data places him near the scene
of the crime, but not actually at the scene of
the crime. Now, his cars built in computer may be
a different story and provide a lot of data, but
so far it has not been presented as evidence.
Speaker 4 (12:01):
When investigators began combing through the crime scene, they found
a tan leather knife sheath underneath Madison's body and the comforter.
According to the probable cause Affidavid police found a single
mail source DNA on the button of that knife sheath.
Later testing identified that DNA as Brian Coburger's.
Speaker 8 (12:24):
On the face of it, this DNA link on the
knife sheath is very strong evidence against Coburger, but upon
closer inspection, the existence of DNA on the sheaf doesn't
actually mean Coburger was there the knight of the murders.
All it really means is that at some point he
came into contact with the knife sheath.
Speaker 7 (12:40):
And granted this all sounds very suspicious, but again just
throwing it out there as an alternate theory. Maybe somebody
is trying to frame Coburger and that the real killer
placed the knife sheath where the victims were murdered.
Speaker 8 (12:53):
That is certainly an argument that defense could and probably
will make without a murder weapon. This evidence is circumstantial.
Remember this, for Gill is beyond a reasonable doubt.
Speaker 7 (13:02):
It does seem like there's a lot of evidence mounting
against Coburger. There are also plenty of places, though, to
raise reasonable doubt.
Speaker 4 (13:12):
Let's stop here for a break. We'll be back in
a moment. If Brian Coberger's innocent as he claims, are
there any alternative theories that could explain the murders Jeff
and Stephanie.
Speaker 8 (13:30):
Like so many murder investigations, the police looked into many
different possibilities. In the immediate aftermath of the crimes. The
first suspect was Kaylee's ex boyfriend, a young man named Jack.
The para dated for about five years and had recently
broken up, but they were still in communication the night
of the murders. Between two twenty six and two forty
four am, Kaylee called Jack six times. Then between two
(13:51):
forty four and two fifty two am, Madison, who was
presumably with Kaylee, called him three times. Finally, at two
fifty two am, Kaylee called him one more time, all
to no avail.
Speaker 7 (14:01):
This was all so tragic for Jack, but again it's
very common to look at the people closest to the
victims first when you're starting an investigation. But he was
ultimately cleared very quickly.
Speaker 8 (14:12):
So after the ex boyfriend, we heard about a supposed stalker.
A local business owner went to the press and said
that about three weeks before the murders, they overheard Madison
and Kaylee voicing concerns about Kaylee being stocked. She said
she would beg friends to walk closely behind her at
all times after becoming terrified of someone who would follow
her around town. Could this mystery stocker also be the killer?
Speaker 7 (14:32):
And that story was also backed up by the footage
from this food truck. In this video, if you've seen it,
it appeared that there was this gentleman, a young guy
kind of following Kaylee and Madison. And again, depending upon
how you look at this footage, you could interpret this
person as looking creepy or suspicious because he was wearing
(14:53):
a hood. It's a snippet of a video. So is
everyone just grasping at straws or is this actual real evidence.
Speaker 8 (15:03):
Well staph. After this food truck guy, we heard about
Xana's Doordashulibry and whether or not the driver might have
seen something or somehow been involved.
Speaker 7 (15:11):
And there were also all of those rumors about a
love triangle gone wrong and scorned roommates seeking revenge. It
all was getting extremely nuts at this point. It seems
as though social media at least was targeting a lot
of people without any information.
Speaker 8 (15:26):
And it's safe to assume that investigators checked out all
these possibilities and people and they were all cleared or
never even considered suspects in the first place. But unfortunately,
with a case like this, it doesn't really mean much
for these innocent men and women because they were not
free from online abuse and the court of public opinion.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
Within hours of the brutal murders, local and national media
descended on the once relatively unknown town of Moscow and
began to cover the shocking killings. At nearly the same time,
an invisible army of internet sleuths and trolls began to
speculate on the investigation from Afar. Dozens of YouTube, TikTok, Facebook,
and Reddit groups emerged overnight to discuss, dissect, and analyze
(16:10):
all aspects of the case.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
People are making things up because they want answers and
because the gag order. People are making things up for
content too, So like on Instagram and TikTok and YouTube,
people are just making shut up and the running with
it like it was a drug house and you know
this was a drug deal gone bad and the door
dash driver was secretly delivering cocaine. You know what I mean. Like,
people are just making shut up.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
Despite the massive amount of public interest, for weeks, police
provided few details about the gruesome murders, and the judge
in Idaho also issued a gag order preventing anyone involved
from speaking publicly. The Internet often recklessly jumped in to
fill the void. The baseless speculation and misinformation came with
grim consequences for real innocent people.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
Just no, I'm not the only one who suspect Rebecca's.
Speaker 4 (16:59):
Go a TikTok psychic accused Rebecca Schofield, an associate professor
at the University, of being in a lover's triangle and
orchestrating the murders.
Speaker 5 (17:10):
If anyone would have been considered a person of interest.
Speaker 4 (17:13):
And would have had a motive, it would have been Jack.
At the same time, a YouTuber accused Kaylee's ex boyfriend,
Jack Decor of the killings, suggesting their recent breakup after
five years of dating as a cause for the crime.
Speaker 1 (17:31):
When you talk about like the reddit, because there's so
many subreddits dedicated to this case. There's Idaho four, There's
Moscow Murders, there's you know, Brian Coberger Moscow murders. There's
so many different subreddits dedicated to this case that have,
i mean hundreds of thousands of posts discussing everything under
the sun. And because there's no real moderation, you know,
(17:53):
on those those subreddits, there's all kinds of speculation.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
You know.
Speaker 1 (17:56):
The moderation on some of the subreddits could use little work.
I mean, people are posting, you know, make they're making
things up.
Speaker 4 (18:07):
Deanna Thompson is the co host, along with John Green,
of the upcoming iHeart Kat Studios podcast True Crimes with
John and Deanna. In twenty ten, they led the online
effort to identify and catch the international serial killer Luca
Magnata That case was later turned into the popular Netflix
documentary Don't Fuck with Cats. Stephanie and Jeff.
Speaker 8 (18:33):
John Green and Deana Thompson aren't your typical online slows.
They became famous for their work helping catch a killer online.
It was all showcased in Netflix's Don't f with Cats
in twenty nineteen. Here at Katie Studios, we're actually working
with them on a new podcast called True Crimes, which
will be out later this year.
Speaker 7 (18:48):
And if you haven't seen their documentary, please do. It's
astounding the work that they do. They're the perfect example
of people who really conduct ethical, responsible investigations and turn
over any relevant information to the police. It's impressive and
it's really effective.
Speaker 4 (19:06):
Here's Deanna Thompson aka Body Movin, followed by John Green.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
I do think that people want to make sense of
a really senseless murder of for like super rad people,
you know, like how could this happen? So you have
to make sense of it somehow, And in order to
do that with a gag order and no information coming out,
the only thing that you can do is get on
the internet and talk to other people who are also
(19:32):
trying to figure out what happened and I think that
is cathartic. The problem with it is is imagine being
Dylan or Bethany and having all these rumors come out
about you, like you're involved somehow or you were in
some sort of drug ring or human trafficking. I mean,
the gamut has run wild on these two girls, and
it's really tragic because they are listed as victims. They
(19:55):
are listed as victims, and you don't victim shame people.
And I feel that's what's been done to Dylan and Bethany.
And it was happening to just Dylan because she's mentioned
a lot in the PCA, But now that Bethany has
potentially exculpatory information and she just got a subpoena in
the state of Nevada to come testify at the prelim hearing,
(20:16):
which has been squashed by the way they're going to
come to Nevada and interview her instead. Now all the
attentions on Bethany because she potentially has exculpatory information, and
it's like, what does she know that's going to help Brian,
you know what I mean, Like people are already starting
to point fingers at her and it breaks my heart
for them. And so that side of things I find
quite disgusting, quite disgusting, and I have no qualms in
(20:37):
telling people how disgusting I think they are.
Speaker 9 (20:39):
Another aspect to it is time. When the incident happens
and there's an amount of time that lapses before the police
arrest somebody, I think that it triggers something in people.
So this incident happened November thirteenth. It was a high
profile murder case where four innocent college students in a
small town were killed. Was on all the major news.
(21:01):
Nobody knew. I think people get triggered, like, what is
taking the police so long? Why can't they solve this?
I know, I'm going to jump online and I'm going
to try and figure this out myself. So there's that
time element to it. I think it took six weeks
before they arrested Brian. So when you have this gap
and people think police aren't doing their job, I believe
some of the parents are coming out saying the police
(21:24):
aren't being forthcoming. I think that adds to it and
gives people this sense of hey, let's go online. I mean,
if you arrest somebody within forty eight seventy two hours,
there's no time for the public to go out there
and make these wild accusations, or for psychics to get
involved in you know, try and figure out anytime a
psychic's involved, you know something's not right. Don't listen to psychics.
(21:45):
So I think that was part of this very high
profile case.
Speaker 8 (21:51):
Well, yeah, let's talk about how there's a way to
do it ethically, and that's what you guys do, and
then there's ways with unethically, which is maybe what we're seeing.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
Yeah. So one of the things, you know, and I
don't know if it's an ethical thing or not, but
one of the things that we have done in the
past is we don't really talk about the cases that
we're working on. Ever. We don't post about them.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
We don't ask the public for help.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
We don't and if we do, it's very sneaky, you know,
and it doesn't give anything away. We don't make videos
about them, we don't do anything. And it's specifically because
we don't want the suspect to know that we're looking
at them. Number one, because sometimes I feel like there's
a new case right now and I feel like me
(22:36):
even acknowledging that I know about it gives that the
person that did it like a little bit of a rush,
like Ooh, body Movement's looking at me, you know what
I mean, Like Ooh, I put this cat in a
blunder and maybe i'll i'll, you know, maybe body movement
and John Green will look at my case, you know,
Like I don't want to give them any attention. So
I don't want the suspect to know that I have
(22:57):
the specific evidence I eat puma, which we talk about
a lot in the podcast. I don't want the suspect
to even know that him and I are working on it,
because I think that will give them some sort of
ego boost that these Netflix people are looking at me,
you know, get them happy if there is Like in
(23:18):
the cases that John and I typically work on, the
victim is an animal, right, so there's no like human
being that I have to like be careful with, like
as far as a victim is concerned. But if you
are talking about something like Idaho or there are actual
humans that are victims and family that is suffering, I
(23:40):
just think it's incredibly insensitive to get on national television
and talk about rumors that you've heard where Ethan was
sliced from ankle to groin.
Speaker 9 (23:53):
Do you know what I mean.
Speaker 1 (23:54):
I just think that's it's a rumor. I just think
it's incredibly insensitive. His parents, his brother, their and sister.
They have to see that, you know what I mean.
And while they know what happened, I'm sure by now
they know what happened to him. Do we really need
to know what happened to him right now before court?
Do we need to know that? Is it important that
the public know that you heard a rumor that Ethan
(24:17):
was slashed from ankle to groin? And I just think
it's insensitive and I would never do that.
Speaker 9 (24:23):
Dan and I at the core of it, are true
crime fans, just like people listening to this podcast. And
as a true crime fan, you've watched enough documentaries or
series involving detectives or investigations, you always hear the same thing.
It's an ongoing investigation, no comment, and so you need
to learn to keep a tight lip, not say anything,
(24:43):
don't expose anything that you have or know. You know, again,
we're just armchair detectives, are not experts or anything. Who
are we to go online and making a statement or
accusation or accuse somebody, You know, it's not our place.
We try to collect the evidence, put it in a
format that's easily understandable. Contact the local law enforcement or
(25:04):
wherever has jurisdiction. Talk to somebody there, say hey, we'd
like to email you something. Let them handle it from there.
Speaker 4 (25:14):
Let's stop here for another break. In twenty twenty two,
investigators requested social media videos and photos to help zero
in on the movements of Gabby Patito before and after
(25:34):
she disappeared. Here is Adam Wandit, a digital forensic expert
and professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. He
points out that her case isn't really one of online's
slews breaking the case open, but more an example of
the widespread availability of videos aiding law enforcement.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
In the Gabby Potito case, the evidence that led to
the recovery of Gabby Potito's body was actually evidence that
was on a video camera of somebody who was driving
through the park that accidentally recorded the vehicle that was
used to dump her body in the park, and only
(26:14):
after the case, only after he recorded it, when he
learned on social media that there was a potential body
or murder in that park, he went through his own evidence,
found what he was looking for, posted it to YouTube,
sent it to law enforcement, and in the Gabby Batito
case specifically, that evidence was critical pro finding her body
(26:35):
and bringing her killer to justice. And you know, it
doesn't always happen that the public has that information, but
in the Gabby Batito case they did. But that is certainly,
you know, the rare exception.
Speaker 4 (26:52):
When Internet sleuths have inserted themselves into active cases, it
hasn't always gone well. In twenty thirteen, thousands of online
and amateur detectives rushed to identify the individuals they believed
carried out the Boston marathon bombing. They were wrong and
misidentified several innocent people. With thousands of online sleuths and
(27:13):
commentators posting about the Idaho murders, some have stuck out.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
A user who goes by Papa Roger was a prolific
contributor on the site with many creepy and insensitive posts.
Speaker 4 (27:27):
The prolific poster appear to have knowledge of the facts
of the case before information was officially released. At the
same time, Papa Rogers also made claims that turned out
to be wrong, like suggesting that the white Alantra was
a quote red herring. Many have speculated that the poster
Papa Rogers was in fact Brian Coberger, Stephanie, and Jeff.
Speaker 7 (27:52):
Papa Rogers was a member of the University of Idaho
Murders Case Discussion, which was basically a Facebook group up
out of nowhere and very quickly amassed about two hundred
and twenty five thousand users. That just shows the country's
interest in this case. It's just one of the hundreds
of online groups talking about the case real time, but
(28:13):
of all the members, Papa Rogers he stuck out to
the group because he was being very condescending and very
argumentative to other online users.
Speaker 8 (28:22):
Other things also caused Papa Rogers to be a notable
member of this group. They posted frequently with information that
seemed almost too detailed. For example, one post read of
the evidence released the murder weapon has been consistent as
a large, fixed blade knife. This leads me to believe
they found the sheath. While this time police did say
they were searching for a bladed murder weapon, investigators hadn't
(28:43):
yet said anything about the knife sheath being at the
murder scene until the probable cause AFFIDAVID was released, meaning
that Papa Rogers was either a very good guesser or
they somehow knew something the general public did not, and.
Speaker 7 (28:54):
Also real time over on Readit, a very similar user
named inside Looking also appeared to have a lot of
detailed information that hadn't been released to the press yet.
Speaker 8 (29:04):
One post read speculation killer parked behind the house, approached
property through treeline, entered sliding door, and left it open.
Committed murders an exited sliding door, one knife according to
Corner's statement. Time of murder approximately three twenty to three
forty am, according to the car fleeing the scene and
on camera on Highway eight approximately three forty five am.
Vehicle left skid marks upon exit.
Speaker 7 (29:26):
The detailed post really creeped out the Reddit posters, and
there was this one person I recall saying, quote, Dude,
this guy is solving his own crime, psycho end quote,
really implying that it's possible that the killer has now
joined this group to really better understand the chatter happening
around the crime. Interestingly, or coincidentally, Papa Rodgers was later
(29:49):
kicked out of the group discussion and seemingly disappeared just
before Coburger was arrested.
Speaker 4 (30:00):
More on that next time. For more information on the
case and relevant photos, follow us on Instagram at Kat
Underscore Studios. The Idaho Masacre is produced by Stephanie Leidecker,
Jeff Shane, Connor Powell, Chris Bargo, Gabriel Castillo and me
Courtney Armstrong. Editing and sound designed by Jeff Toi. Music
(30:23):
by Jared Aston. The Idaho Massacre is a production of
iHeart Radio and KAT Studios. For more podcasts like this,
visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen
to your favorite shows. I'm Diana.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
You may know as Body Movin, My Friend and I
John Green were featured in the Netflix documentary Don't f
with Cats. On our new podcast True Crimes with John
and Deiana were turning our online investigative skills to some
of the most unexplained, unsolved, and most ignored cases.
Speaker 8 (30:58):
Please say thirty three year old bride again shot dead.
Speaker 5 (31:00):
Gunned down in front of his two year old daughter.
Speaker 7 (31:03):
Detectives confirmed that it was a targeted attack.
Speaker 9 (31:06):
It appears to be an execution style of assassination.
Speaker 4 (31:09):
This is very active, so we have to be careful.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
I've heard that there's a house that has some bodies
in the basement.
Speaker 6 (31:15):
I knew, I just knew something was wrong.
Speaker 9 (31:18):
Maybe there's something more sinister at play than just one
young girl going missing.
Speaker 8 (31:23):
If you know something, heard something, please it's never too
late to.
Speaker 9 (31:28):
Do the right thing.
Speaker 1 (31:30):
This is true Crimes with John and Deanna, the production of.
Speaker 9 (31:33):
KT Studios and iHeartRadio. Justice is something that takes different
shapes or formed
The medic house to brutally stabbing four University of Idaho
students to death.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Appears in court.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
Coberger is accused of murdering University of Idaho students Kailee Gonzalvez,
Madison Mogan, Zena Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin.
Speaker 4 (00:24):
This is the Idaho Massacre, a production of KT Studios
and iHeartRadio, episode four cracks in the narrative, I'm Courtney Armstrong,
a television producer at KAT Studios, with Stephanie Leidecker, Jeff Shane,
and Connor Powell. After being arrested in Pennsylvania, an extradited
(00:49):
twenty eight year old Brian Coberger is in prison awaiting
trial for the murders of four University of Idaho students.
Six months after police say the former PhD criminology student
committed the brutal murders. Coberger appeared in an Idaho courtroom.
The families of several of the victims watched the arraignment
(01:11):
hearing from the gallery. After a brief glance toward the families,
Coburger kept his head and eyes looking forward.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Day.
Speaker 5 (01:20):
We are now on record in a state of Idaho
versus banger with.
Speaker 4 (01:27):
His feet shackled and wearing an orange prison outfit. Coburger
listened as the judge read the charges against him and
explained that a conviction carried a penalty of life in
prison or death.
Speaker 5 (01:39):
Miss Taylor as mister Coberger prepared to plead to these charges.
Speaker 4 (01:44):
When the judge asked Coburger's attorney if he was ready
to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty, Attorney
Ann Taylor declined. The judge then entered a plea on
behalf of Brian Coburger.
Speaker 5 (01:58):
Because Coberger is standing silent, I'm going to answer that
guilty police each charge.
Speaker 4 (02:07):
The judge then set a trial date for October second.
Speaker 6 (02:11):
Brian was very shocked by his arrest.
Speaker 4 (02:14):
While investigators believe they have their man, the case against
Brian Cobeger is far from airtight.
Speaker 6 (02:21):
Eager to be exonerated was the language he used as
he was asserting innocence.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
It's important to note that Brian Cobeger has not been
found guilty of any crimes. Monroe County public defender Jason
Lebar represented Coburger in Pennsylvania after his arrest. Lebar is
no longer working for Coburger, but has been a regular
on TV and in the media, pushing back on the
official police narrative.
Speaker 6 (02:47):
It's a strong circumstantial case, but the evidence, when it
is viewed individually, you can attack that evidence as a
defense attorney.
Speaker 4 (02:57):
Here's Stephanie and Jeff.
Speaker 7 (03:00):
So at this point, officials are in the very early
stages of laying out their case against the alleged killer,
Brian Coburger.
Speaker 8 (03:07):
Yeah, all that's been released is this nineteen page probable
cause AFFIDAVID. A probable cause affidavid is a summary of
the evidence and circumstances of the arrest. It's usually written
by the arresting officer and given to a judge for
a review.
Speaker 7 (03:19):
And within these nineteen pages we learned a lot about
the night of the massacre and how police zeroed in
on Coburger specifically.
Speaker 8 (03:27):
A lot of the evidence at this stage is merely circumstantial. Now,
for listeners who don't know or need a reminder, circumstantial
evidence is evidence of facts that the court can draw
conclusions from. So in this case, the fact that we
know Coburger's cell phone pinged off of towers near the
scene of the crime points to the idea that he
may have been around the area when these murders were committed,
and when you put all of that together, it paints
(03:48):
a pretty damning picture, but it's not direct evidence like
DNA or being in possession of the murder weapon. We
need to remember that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty,
and as Coburger's first attorney pointed out, the best way
for any defense to attack the prosecution is to remind
the jury that everything the prosecution has is circumstantial, because
at the end of the day, all the defense needs
(04:08):
to do is find one jury member who has doubts
about the case.
Speaker 7 (04:12):
And it's also important to note that likely investigators have
more evidence than their sharing at this point. In the
immediate aftermath of the brutal murders, Moscow police said the
two surviving roommates, Dylan Mortensen and Bethany Funk, were home
during the murders, but they did not wake up until
later in the morning. That information was part of every
(04:35):
timeline until December twentieth, when Moscow pdeve removed it. Ten
days later, when Brian Coberger was arrested, police stated in
the probable cause Affidavid that Dylan was not only awake,
but had seen the attacker.
Speaker 3 (04:52):
This time, she saw a dark figure standing there in
black clothing, wearing a mask that covered that person's mouth.
She remembered that person being about five foot ten, not
very muscular, but with an athletic build. She also remembered
seeing bushy eyebrows.
Speaker 4 (05:07):
Here again, Jeff and Stephanie.
Speaker 8 (05:11):
Regardless of what Dylan may or may not have seen,
she and Bethany are both victims and all this. They
lived through a serious trauma, They lost their friends, and
have been skewered by the media.
Speaker 4 (05:21):
It's just not right.
Speaker 7 (05:23):
The prosecution may be sympathetic to that, but they also
have a case to close, and Dylan is the big
star witness, and the question is, though, is sheer reliable.
Speaker 3 (05:32):
One terrified she remained frozen in place as the suspect
walked past her and left out the sliding glass door
behind her.
Speaker 8 (05:40):
There are some things we know based on the probable
cause effidavit. We know that Dylan was quote unquote frozen
in fear, that she heard some sort of cries from
her roommates, and she saw a masked man who was
slender but not muscular, with bushy eyebrows.
Speaker 7 (05:53):
Dylan's description definitely offers something, but again, it doesn't really
link Brian Coberger to the murder, not very muscular, having
bushy eyebrows that could describe a lot of people. She
also made no mention of skin color or hair color.
Speaker 8 (06:09):
While at first the information dell And provided seemed to
point the finger at Coburger, upon closer look at actually
might be more helpful for the defense because this vague
description could cause reasonable doubt amongst dury members.
Speaker 7 (06:21):
Detectives announced that they are interested in talking to the
person or people in a white twenty eleven to twenty
thirteen Hondai Elektra.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
The first piece of evidence that appears to connect Brian
Koberger to the crime is his white Hondai Alantra.
Speaker 8 (06:40):
It may be a big break in the case.
Speaker 7 (06:42):
A grainy image of a speeding car that could be
the white Hondai Alantra police are looking for.
Speaker 4 (06:51):
According to the probable Cause Affidavid, multiple security cameras caught
a white Alantra driving past the home on King Road
within minutes around the murders. Coburger's first defense attorney, Jason
Lebar points out that white Olanchas are common cars and
Coburger is just one of many owners of the four
door Sedan.
Speaker 6 (07:10):
The white A Lantra can't be determined to be his
white Alantra. I mean, there's circumstantial evidence indicating that it
could potentially be his white A Launcher, but there's certainly
not direct evidence.
Speaker 4 (07:24):
Again, Jeff and Stephanie.
Speaker 8 (07:27):
We know that within days of the murders, police told
the wider community to be on the lookout for a
white Hyundai Elantra.
Speaker 7 (07:32):
As a result, the officer at WSU found this exact
type of car registered to Brian Coburger.
Speaker 8 (07:39):
Police also checked his records and noted that Coburger had
changed his registration from Pennsylvania to Washington State on November eighteenth,
which was just days after the murder.
Speaker 6 (07:49):
They don't have direct evidence that he's driving the white Alantra.
Speaker 8 (07:52):
Here's the problem. Police haven't provided any evidence that Coburger
was actually driving the car speeding past the house on
King Road as of this moment. There's no highway or
red light camera photos, nothing.
Speaker 4 (08:03):
That we know of.
Speaker 7 (08:04):
And keep in mind, at this point we may not
have all the information that the police does.
Speaker 8 (08:08):
That's true, and we also don't know what they found
in the car. According to experts we talked to, if
this was Coburger's car and he really did kill four
people and then get in and drive away, it's likely that,
no matter how well he scrubbed and cleaned, there would
be some sort of DNA evidence in that car from
the night in question.
Speaker 7 (08:24):
And I think it's worth noting that DNA can take
weeks to process, and at the time of his arrest,
investigators didn't have access to his car.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
However, now weeks later they do. A key part of
the prosecution of Brian Coburger will be putting him at
the scene of the crime. Police also need to place
Brian Coberger behind the wheel of the suspected vehicle in
the probable cause AFFIDAVID Investigators rely on historical cell side
(08:55):
data to make this connection. Here again Jeff and Stephanie.
Speaker 7 (09:00):
So in an effort to track Coburger, police really had
to rely on cell phone towers and to see where
Coburger's cell phone was pinging from A.
Speaker 8 (09:10):
Cell phone pang is the act of determining the estimated
current location of a cell phone. This may be accomplished
via GPS data or by using cell phone tower triangulation, which,
as we know in this case, is what they used.
Speaker 7 (09:21):
Police were able to get a search warrant for Coburger's
cell phone records because he had been pulled over for
a traffic violation prior and he gave police his cell
phone number. Upon reviewing the records, police determined that Coburger's
phone was connecting to towers in Moscow around that time,
and that his movements were very similar to what the
(09:42):
alleged killer was doing at that time.
Speaker 8 (09:45):
And so I think what we surmise from this is
that we are all glued to our phones. I'm here's
my in my hand right now. So it stands to
reason that of Coburger was in the car that night,
so was his phone. However, it should be noted that
locating a mobile phone based on a single Stete cell
phone tower places the phone in a broad area, but
it cannot actually pinpoint the exact location. So it's not
(10:05):
like this is one hundred percent reliable science.
Speaker 4 (10:08):
Cell Phones are intimate devices. Their data knows a lot
about us. If Coburger's phone was in his car, then
he was likely in his car. Once police began to
hone in on Brian Coburger, they began looking at his
movements around the time of the murders. He had given
his cell phone number to a deputy during a previous
traffic stop, so police got a search warrant for his
(10:29):
cell phone records. A police review determined Coburger's phone was
connecting to towers in the Moscow area and were similar
to the movements of the suspected white Atlantra investigators believed
was the murder vehicle. But cell phone pings on a
tower are not precise GPS location coordinates.
Speaker 6 (10:47):
If it was GPS location cordinates, you're talking down to
a meter as to where Brian Coburger was at the
time of these crimes, Whereas a cell phone tower ping
is that you're within a radius of that tower up
to twenty miles. And obviously mister Coburger lived within ten
miles of the University of Idaho where these crimes were committed,
(11:07):
so certainly he could ping at any moment in time
near the actual crime.
Speaker 7 (11:12):
The night of the murders, Coburger's phone was tracked heading
to Moscow before the attack, but his phone was off
from two forty seven am to four forty eight AM.
Speaker 8 (11:23):
So what you're saying is that this looks like what
he's trying to conceal his location for these approximately two hours.
Speaker 7 (11:28):
Coburger's former attorney said, just because Coburger's phone pings at
a tower doesn't mean much considering the short distance between Pullman, Washington,
where Coburger lived, and Moscow, where the victims were murdered.
Speaker 8 (11:42):
Right because the phone data places him near the scene
of the crime, but not actually at the scene of
the crime. Now, his cars built in computer may be
a different story and provide a lot of data, but
so far it has not been presented as evidence.
Speaker 4 (12:01):
When investigators began combing through the crime scene, they found
a tan leather knife sheath underneath Madison's body and the comforter.
According to the probable cause Affidavid police found a single
mail source DNA on the button of that knife sheath.
Later testing identified that DNA as Brian Coburger's.
Speaker 8 (12:24):
On the face of it, this DNA link on the
knife sheath is very strong evidence against Coburger, but upon
closer inspection, the existence of DNA on the sheaf doesn't
actually mean Coburger was there the knight of the murders.
All it really means is that at some point he
came into contact with the knife sheath.
Speaker 7 (12:40):
And granted this all sounds very suspicious, but again just
throwing it out there as an alternate theory. Maybe somebody
is trying to frame Coburger and that the real killer
placed the knife sheath where the victims were murdered.
Speaker 8 (12:53):
That is certainly an argument that defense could and probably
will make without a murder weapon. This evidence is circumstantial.
Remember this, for Gill is beyond a reasonable doubt.
Speaker 7 (13:02):
It does seem like there's a lot of evidence mounting
against Coburger. There are also plenty of places, though, to
raise reasonable doubt.
Speaker 4 (13:12):
Let's stop here for a break. We'll be back in
a moment. If Brian Coberger's innocent as he claims, are
there any alternative theories that could explain the murders Jeff
and Stephanie.
Speaker 8 (13:30):
Like so many murder investigations, the police looked into many
different possibilities. In the immediate aftermath of the crimes. The
first suspect was Kaylee's ex boyfriend, a young man named Jack.
The para dated for about five years and had recently
broken up, but they were still in communication the night
of the murders. Between two twenty six and two forty
four am, Kaylee called Jack six times. Then between two
(13:51):
forty four and two fifty two am, Madison, who was
presumably with Kaylee, called him three times. Finally, at two
fifty two am, Kaylee called him one more time, all
to no avail.
Speaker 7 (14:01):
This was all so tragic for Jack, but again it's
very common to look at the people closest to the
victims first when you're starting an investigation. But he was
ultimately cleared very quickly.
Speaker 8 (14:12):
So after the ex boyfriend, we heard about a supposed stalker.
A local business owner went to the press and said
that about three weeks before the murders, they overheard Madison
and Kaylee voicing concerns about Kaylee being stocked. She said
she would beg friends to walk closely behind her at
all times after becoming terrified of someone who would follow
her around town. Could this mystery stocker also be the killer?
Speaker 7 (14:32):
And that story was also backed up by the footage
from this food truck. In this video, if you've seen it,
it appeared that there was this gentleman, a young guy
kind of following Kaylee and Madison. And again, depending upon
how you look at this footage, you could interpret this
person as looking creepy or suspicious because he was wearing
(14:53):
a hood. It's a snippet of a video. So is
everyone just grasping at straws or is this actual real evidence.
Speaker 8 (15:03):
Well staph. After this food truck guy, we heard about
Xana's Doordashulibry and whether or not the driver might have
seen something or somehow been involved.
Speaker 7 (15:11):
And there were also all of those rumors about a
love triangle gone wrong and scorned roommates seeking revenge. It
all was getting extremely nuts at this point. It seems
as though social media at least was targeting a lot
of people without any information.
Speaker 8 (15:26):
And it's safe to assume that investigators checked out all
these possibilities and people and they were all cleared or
never even considered suspects in the first place. But unfortunately,
with a case like this, it doesn't really mean much
for these innocent men and women because they were not
free from online abuse and the court of public opinion.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
Within hours of the brutal murders, local and national media
descended on the once relatively unknown town of Moscow and
began to cover the shocking killings. At nearly the same time,
an invisible army of internet sleuths and trolls began to
speculate on the investigation from Afar. Dozens of YouTube, TikTok, Facebook,
and Reddit groups emerged overnight to discuss, dissect, and analyze
(16:10):
all aspects of the case.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
People are making things up because they want answers and
because the gag order. People are making things up for
content too, So like on Instagram and TikTok and YouTube,
people are just making shut up and the running with
it like it was a drug house and you know
this was a drug deal gone bad and the door
dash driver was secretly delivering cocaine. You know what I mean. Like,
people are just making shut up.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
Despite the massive amount of public interest, for weeks, police
provided few details about the gruesome murders, and the judge
in Idaho also issued a gag order preventing anyone involved
from speaking publicly. The Internet often recklessly jumped in to
fill the void. The baseless speculation and misinformation came with
grim consequences for real innocent people.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
Just no, I'm not the only one who suspect Rebecca's.
Speaker 4 (16:59):
Go a TikTok psychic accused Rebecca Schofield, an associate professor
at the University, of being in a lover's triangle and
orchestrating the murders.
Speaker 5 (17:10):
If anyone would have been considered a person of interest.
Speaker 4 (17:13):
And would have had a motive, it would have been Jack.
At the same time, a YouTuber accused Kaylee's ex boyfriend,
Jack Decor of the killings, suggesting their recent breakup after
five years of dating as a cause for the crime.
Speaker 1 (17:31):
When you talk about like the reddit, because there's so
many subreddits dedicated to this case. There's Idaho four, There's
Moscow Murders, there's you know, Brian Coberger Moscow murders. There's
so many different subreddits dedicated to this case that have,
i mean hundreds of thousands of posts discussing everything under
the sun. And because there's no real moderation, you know,
(17:53):
on those those subreddits, there's all kinds of speculation.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
You know.
Speaker 1 (17:56):
The moderation on some of the subreddits could use little work.
I mean, people are posting, you know, make they're making
things up.
Speaker 4 (18:07):
Deanna Thompson is the co host, along with John Green,
of the upcoming iHeart Kat Studios podcast True Crimes with
John and Deanna. In twenty ten, they led the online
effort to identify and catch the international serial killer Luca
Magnata That case was later turned into the popular Netflix
documentary Don't Fuck with Cats. Stephanie and Jeff.
Speaker 8 (18:33):
John Green and Deana Thompson aren't your typical online slows.
They became famous for their work helping catch a killer online.
It was all showcased in Netflix's Don't f with Cats
in twenty nineteen. Here at Katie Studios, we're actually working
with them on a new podcast called True Crimes, which
will be out later this year.
Speaker 7 (18:48):
And if you haven't seen their documentary, please do. It's
astounding the work that they do. They're the perfect example
of people who really conduct ethical, responsible investigations and turn
over any relevant information to the police. It's impressive and
it's really effective.
Speaker 4 (19:06):
Here's Deanna Thompson aka Body Movin, followed by John Green.
Speaker 1 (19:11):
I do think that people want to make sense of
a really senseless murder of for like super rad people,
you know, like how could this happen? So you have
to make sense of it somehow, And in order to
do that with a gag order and no information coming out,
the only thing that you can do is get on
the internet and talk to other people who are also
(19:32):
trying to figure out what happened and I think that
is cathartic. The problem with it is is imagine being
Dylan or Bethany and having all these rumors come out
about you, like you're involved somehow or you were in
some sort of drug ring or human trafficking. I mean,
the gamut has run wild on these two girls, and
it's really tragic because they are listed as victims. They
(19:55):
are listed as victims, and you don't victim shame people.
And I feel that's what's been done to Dylan and Bethany.
And it was happening to just Dylan because she's mentioned
a lot in the PCA, But now that Bethany has
potentially exculpatory information and she just got a subpoena in
the state of Nevada to come testify at the prelim hearing,
(20:16):
which has been squashed by the way they're going to
come to Nevada and interview her instead. Now all the
attentions on Bethany because she potentially has exculpatory information, and
it's like, what does she know that's going to help Brian,
you know what I mean, Like people are already starting
to point fingers at her and it breaks my heart
for them. And so that side of things I find
quite disgusting, quite disgusting, and I have no qualms in
(20:37):
telling people how disgusting I think they are.
Speaker 9 (20:39):
Another aspect to it is time. When the incident happens
and there's an amount of time that lapses before the police
arrest somebody, I think that it triggers something in people.
So this incident happened November thirteenth. It was a high
profile murder case where four innocent college students in a
small town were killed. Was on all the major news.
(21:01):
Nobody knew. I think people get triggered, like, what is
taking the police so long? Why can't they solve this?
I know, I'm going to jump online and I'm going
to try and figure this out myself. So there's that
time element to it. I think it took six weeks
before they arrested Brian. So when you have this gap
and people think police aren't doing their job, I believe
some of the parents are coming out saying the police
(21:24):
aren't being forthcoming. I think that adds to it and
gives people this sense of hey, let's go online. I mean,
if you arrest somebody within forty eight seventy two hours,
there's no time for the public to go out there
and make these wild accusations, or for psychics to get
involved in you know, try and figure out anytime a
psychic's involved, you know something's not right. Don't listen to psychics.
(21:45):
So I think that was part of this very high
profile case.
Speaker 8 (21:51):
Well, yeah, let's talk about how there's a way to
do it ethically, and that's what you guys do, and
then there's ways with unethically, which is maybe what we're seeing.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
Yeah. So one of the things, you know, and I
don't know if it's an ethical thing or not, but
one of the things that we have done in the
past is we don't really talk about the cases that
we're working on. Ever. We don't post about them.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
We don't ask the public for help.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
We don't and if we do, it's very sneaky, you know,
and it doesn't give anything away. We don't make videos
about them, we don't do anything. And it's specifically because
we don't want the suspect to know that we're looking
at them. Number one, because sometimes I feel like there's
a new case right now and I feel like me
(22:36):
even acknowledging that I know about it gives that the
person that did it like a little bit of a rush,
like Ooh, body Movement's looking at me, you know what
I mean, Like Ooh, I put this cat in a
blunder and maybe i'll i'll, you know, maybe body movement
and John Green will look at my case, you know,
Like I don't want to give them any attention. So
I don't want the suspect to know that I have
(22:57):
the specific evidence I eat puma, which we talk about
a lot in the podcast. I don't want the suspect
to even know that him and I are working on it,
because I think that will give them some sort of
ego boost that these Netflix people are looking at me,
you know, get them happy if there is Like in
(23:18):
the cases that John and I typically work on, the
victim is an animal, right, so there's no like human
being that I have to like be careful with, like
as far as a victim is concerned. But if you
are talking about something like Idaho or there are actual
humans that are victims and family that is suffering, I
(23:40):
just think it's incredibly insensitive to get on national television
and talk about rumors that you've heard where Ethan was
sliced from ankle to groin.
Speaker 9 (23:53):
Do you know what I mean.
Speaker 1 (23:54):
I just think that's it's a rumor. I just think
it's incredibly insensitive. His parents, his brother, their and sister.
They have to see that, you know what I mean.
And while they know what happened, I'm sure by now
they know what happened to him. Do we really need
to know what happened to him right now before court?
Do we need to know that? Is it important that
the public know that you heard a rumor that Ethan
(24:17):
was slashed from ankle to groin? And I just think
it's insensitive and I would never do that.
Speaker 9 (24:23):
Dan and I at the core of it, are true
crime fans, just like people listening to this podcast. And
as a true crime fan, you've watched enough documentaries or
series involving detectives or investigations, you always hear the same thing.
It's an ongoing investigation, no comment, and so you need
to learn to keep a tight lip, not say anything,
(24:43):
don't expose anything that you have or know. You know, again,
we're just armchair detectives, are not experts or anything. Who
are we to go online and making a statement or
accusation or accuse somebody, You know, it's not our place.
We try to collect the evidence, put it in a
format that's easily understandable. Contact the local law enforcement or
(25:04):
wherever has jurisdiction. Talk to somebody there, say hey, we'd
like to email you something. Let them handle it from there.
Speaker 4 (25:14):
Let's stop here for another break. In twenty twenty two,
investigators requested social media videos and photos to help zero
in on the movements of Gabby Patito before and after
(25:34):
she disappeared. Here is Adam Wandit, a digital forensic expert
and professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. He
points out that her case isn't really one of online's
slews breaking the case open, but more an example of
the widespread availability of videos aiding law enforcement.
Speaker 2 (25:53):
In the Gabby Potito case, the evidence that led to
the recovery of Gabby Potito's body was actually evidence that
was on a video camera of somebody who was driving
through the park that accidentally recorded the vehicle that was
used to dump her body in the park, and only
(26:14):
after the case, only after he recorded it, when he
learned on social media that there was a potential body
or murder in that park, he went through his own evidence,
found what he was looking for, posted it to YouTube,
sent it to law enforcement, and in the Gabby Batito
case specifically, that evidence was critical pro finding her body
(26:35):
and bringing her killer to justice. And you know, it
doesn't always happen that the public has that information, but
in the Gabby Batito case they did. But that is certainly,
you know, the rare exception.
Speaker 4 (26:52):
When Internet sleuths have inserted themselves into active cases, it
hasn't always gone well. In twenty thirteen, thousands of online
and amateur detectives rushed to identify the individuals they believed
carried out the Boston marathon bombing. They were wrong and
misidentified several innocent people. With thousands of online sleuths and
(27:13):
commentators posting about the Idaho murders, some have stuck out.
Speaker 1 (27:18):
A user who goes by Papa Roger was a prolific
contributor on the site with many creepy and insensitive posts.
Speaker 4 (27:27):
The prolific poster appear to have knowledge of the facts
of the case before information was officially released. At the
same time, Papa Rogers also made claims that turned out
to be wrong, like suggesting that the white Alantra was
a quote red herring. Many have speculated that the poster
Papa Rogers was in fact Brian Coberger, Stephanie, and Jeff.
Speaker 7 (27:52):
Papa Rogers was a member of the University of Idaho
Murders Case Discussion, which was basically a Facebook group up
out of nowhere and very quickly amassed about two hundred
and twenty five thousand users. That just shows the country's
interest in this case. It's just one of the hundreds
of online groups talking about the case real time, but
(28:13):
of all the members, Papa Rogers he stuck out to
the group because he was being very condescending and very
argumentative to other online users.
Speaker 8 (28:22):
Other things also caused Papa Rogers to be a notable
member of this group. They posted frequently with information that
seemed almost too detailed. For example, one post read of
the evidence released the murder weapon has been consistent as
a large, fixed blade knife. This leads me to believe
they found the sheath. While this time police did say
they were searching for a bladed murder weapon, investigators hadn't
(28:43):
yet said anything about the knife sheath being at the
murder scene until the probable cause AFFIDAVID was released, meaning
that Papa Rogers was either a very good guesser or
they somehow knew something the general public did not, and.
Speaker 7 (28:54):
Also real time over on Readit, a very similar user
named inside Looking also appeared to have a lot of
detailed information that hadn't been released to the press yet.
Speaker 8 (29:04):
One post read speculation killer parked behind the house, approached
property through treeline, entered sliding door, and left it open.
Committed murders an exited sliding door, one knife according to
Corner's statement. Time of murder approximately three twenty to three
forty am, according to the car fleeing the scene and
on camera on Highway eight approximately three forty five am.
Vehicle left skid marks upon exit.
Speaker 7 (29:26):
The detailed post really creeped out the Reddit posters, and
there was this one person I recall saying, quote, Dude,
this guy is solving his own crime, psycho end quote,
really implying that it's possible that the killer has now
joined this group to really better understand the chatter happening
around the crime. Interestingly, or coincidentally, Papa Rodgers was later
(29:49):
kicked out of the group discussion and seemingly disappeared just
before Coburger was arrested.
Speaker 4 (30:00):
More on that next time. For more information on the
case and relevant photos, follow us on Instagram at Kat
Underscore Studios. The Idaho Masacre is produced by Stephanie Leidecker,
Jeff Shane, Connor Powell, Chris Bargo, Gabriel Castillo and me
Courtney Armstrong. Editing and sound designed by Jeff Toi. Music
(30:23):
by Jared Aston. The Idaho Massacre is a production of
iHeart Radio and KAT Studios. For more podcasts like this,
visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen
to your favorite shows. I'm Diana.
Speaker 1 (30:40):
You may know as Body Movin, My Friend and I
John Green were featured in the Netflix documentary Don't f
with Cats. On our new podcast True Crimes with John
and Deiana were turning our online investigative skills to some
of the most unexplained, unsolved, and most ignored cases.
Speaker 8 (30:58):
Please say thirty three year old bride again shot dead.
Speaker 5 (31:00):
Gunned down in front of his two year old daughter.
Speaker 7 (31:03):
Detectives confirmed that it was a targeted attack.
Speaker 9 (31:06):
It appears to be an execution style of assassination.
Speaker 4 (31:09):
This is very active, so we have to be careful.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
I've heard that there's a house that has some bodies
in the basement.
Speaker 6 (31:15):
I knew, I just knew something was wrong.
Speaker 9 (31:18):
Maybe there's something more sinister at play than just one
young girl going missing.
Speaker 8 (31:23):
If you know something, heard something, please it's never too
late to.
Speaker 9 (31:28):
Do the right thing.
Speaker 1 (31:30):
This is true Crimes with John and Deanna, the production of.
Speaker 9 (31:33):
KT Studios and iHeartRadio. Justice is something that takes different
shapes or formed
Hosts And Creators
Courtney Armstrong
Stephanie Lydecker
Jeff Shane
Popular Podcasts
1. 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.
2. Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
3. Crime Junkie
If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people.