Legally Brunette: The Idaho College Murders

Four college roommates were murdered in their home in 2022. 

Now, Brian Kohberger faces the death penalty for these crimes, and the evidence keeps piling up…

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hi, guys, Welcome to another episode of Legally Brunette. I'll
be your host, Emily Simpson with my sidekick Shane. I
love how Shane always just has a first name. It's
never Shane Simpson. It's like Shaer Madonna and Shane. Anyway,
we're just gonna do a little update. If you listened
to the last episode, we did a little tidbit on
this Kimberly Sullivan case, which is the crazy step mom

(00:24):
who kept her step son locked away for twenty years. Anyway,
there's just a little bit of an update on that.
She the biological mom, which we were questioning before. Remember
when we were talking about this case, like where is
the Yeah, because it's the step mom that kept him
locked away. Yes, So there was a USA article that
came out that so the biological mom came forward and

(00:48):
the biological mom is a fifty two year old woman
named Tracy and she was who identified herself as the
biological mother of Kimberly Sullivan's stepson. And she said, thirty
two years ago, due to personal reasons and for the
full benefit of my son, she made the gut wrenching
decision to give full custody to the ex husband. First

(01:09):
of all, I just have to say, as a mother,
I can never wrap my brain around someone giving away
full custody of their children, regardless of the circumstances. I
just I cannot imagine any scenario where I give up.

Speaker 2 (01:22):
My children, unless it was a full blown adoption scenario,
like a parent is giving away the child for a
better life.

Speaker 1 (01:30):
To go and oh, okay, no, I understand that. I
guess I don't understand a situation where you're the biological mother,
you have the child, but then you give up full
custody to the other parent and you just don't want
any kind of visitation or anything anyway. She said it
was a painful, emotional decision that's hard for any mother
to make, but she thought it would have She thought
her son would have a better life, which is the

(01:52):
irony here in retrospect, this does not come to pass.
For the last thirty years, my family and I have
searched for him to reconnect, only to be turned away
and shut out. So she claims that they had been
looking for him and that she had reached out, and
that basically the father and the stepmom didn't want her
to have anything to do with the child.

Speaker 3 (02:10):
Well, yeah, because she's gonna find out he was locked
in a room.

Speaker 1 (02:12):
Probably. She claims that the last few days had been
so shocking, disturbing, and disgusting to even seem true. I
hope him, pray we can all begin to heal and
help my son to lead a full, happy, loving life.
I know deep in my heart I have always been
there for him and always will. Please grant us time,
peace and respect as we cope with this tragic situation.
So she said that she had tried to be in

(02:33):
her son's life. She also has a daughter who would
be the man who was I guess they never released
his name. I just keep calling him the man, but
he's the step son and the one that was the victim,
the victim that was locked away. He has a half sister,
and apparently the half sister had been using social media
and other online tools to try and find her brother

(02:54):
for years, but had not had any success. Well, we
know he's not on social media because he's been tortured
for the past twenty years.

Speaker 3 (03:02):
So you know it now.

Speaker 2 (03:03):
It's kind of sad because these people wanted to look
for him, and they were probably hopeful they'd have a
relationship with him. And then he was in a good
place and that maybe you know, he had good upbringing
and now they could reconnect, now that maybe the mom
is in a better situation, and only to find out
that he.

Speaker 1 (03:18):
Was you know, yeah, well, I mean, how devastated would
you be as a mother if her intent in the
beginning was really she did give up custody because she
thought he would have a better life with the father
who maybe was more She might.

Speaker 2 (03:31):
Have thought it would be less co parenting issues, and
maybe he could have some stability because maybe they were
at odds, and so she thought, you know what, instead
of me fighting this father all the time, maybe I'll
give him a stable household and just let him go.

Speaker 1 (03:44):
Yeah. But then to think thirty years old, I yeah,
find out that you gave away full custody of your
child because you thought they would have a better life,
and then you come to learn that they were locked away, starved, emaciated.

Speaker 3 (03:57):
Torture and almost couldn't have been a worse life.

Speaker 1 (04:00):
Had to set their house on fire in order to
get someone's attention and be saved. His half sister says,
I just want him to know that he has a
big sister, And I've always known he had, that he's existed.
I've always loved him and I've always been trying to
find him. I've been looking for him for over a decade.
I wanted to wait until he was eighteen. I'm almost
thirty five now. There was nothing, no social media, no

(04:22):
court records. So it seems to me that she did
kind of try to do.

Speaker 2 (04:25):
A deep diet doesn't exist. And I bet you the
parents deliberately were not on the internet.

Speaker 1 (04:32):
Also, probably they were probably hiding this, hiding everything about this,
this family life.

Speaker 3 (04:37):
Now they're all over the internet.

Speaker 1 (04:39):
Yeah. So, Kimberly Sullivan, who is the stepmom this step son.
I don't know where she's at as far as a case,
I mean as she was arrested, and I don't think
we've had any update, right, I.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
Don't know, but hope she doesn't get doesn't see the
light a day, right.

Speaker 1 (04:54):
So, the step son and his biological mother have not
connected since this discovery, which was a month ago, but
the mother told NBC Connecticut that she hopes that they
reunite soon. I hope so too. I hope I hope
that he has some yes, And it sounds like the
sister is very interested in being a part of his life.
So hopefully there is some happy ending for this man.

Speaker 2 (05:16):
Because maybe he can get uh, maybe he can collect
the insurance proceeds from the f fire.

Speaker 1 (05:21):
He deserves at least that much. Yes, all right, here's
another interesting story. I just want to do a little
brief background on some of these smaller cases, and then
we're actually going to go into the Brian Coburger case,
which is the Idaho murders case. I just I read
this and I actually found this. I don't know why
I found it interesting. Maybe because it's a husband and
wife and we're a husband.

Speaker 3 (05:44):
Now.

Speaker 2 (05:44):
I'm curious to know what it says, wife kills husband.
I find this interesting.

Speaker 1 (05:48):
It's actually husband tries to kill a wife. But oh,
so this is Ario and his name's Gerhard Koenig. He
is a man accused of trying to kill his wife
in Hawaii. This just recently happened. So on Monday, March
twenty fourth, forty six year old Gerhard tried to push
his wife Ariel off of a cliff in Oahu on
a trip that he planned for her birthday.

Speaker 3 (06:11):
So they're not from Hawaii.

Speaker 1 (06:12):
No, I think they live in Maui.

Speaker 2 (06:14):
Actually Okay, so they're locals, yes, and so thanks for
her birthday, he plans a birthday trips surprise, yes.

Speaker 3 (06:22):
Push.

Speaker 1 (06:24):
The couple, who have been married for six years and
shared two young children together, live in Maui. Ariel told
the story of her attempted murder in her own words
and an application for a restraining order against her husband
on Thursday.

Speaker 2 (06:35):
So he how did she succeed? How did she overcome
his pushing her off a cliff?

Speaker 1 (06:41):
Okay, so let's get into the details of this. Gerhard,
who is the husband, suggested that they take a hike
on a trail near one of the local lookouts. In
her court filing, she noted the topography of the trail,
saying it was very narrow ridge sections with steep drop
offs on both sides. He then won it as selfie

(07:01):
at the edge of the cliff, but she was uncomfortable
and moved away. He's like, no, one foot off the
cliffs closer a little more, she said. That was when
her husband tried to push her. He was yelling something
to the effect of get back over here. I'm so
effing sick of you, and he continued to push me.

(07:23):
She wrote. She thought he was joking at first, I
don't know why I would.

Speaker 2 (07:26):
Oh, so he wants to give her some last words
before he pushes her off.

Speaker 3 (07:31):
Well, he's mad.

Speaker 1 (07:32):
Because she's moving away. She's not close enough to the edge,
so he's yelling at her to get back over there.
And then she claims that she quickly realized that he
was not joking, that he was seriously trying to make
me fall off of the cliff. She then writes, and
this is an application for a restraining order, that she
threw herself onto the ground away from the edge to

(07:53):
save herself, at which point her husband climbed on top
of her. At one point, she said, this is a doctor.
By the way, he's an antithesiologist. He grabbed his bag
and pulled out a syringe and vial and tried to
inject her.

Speaker 3 (08:06):
He brought his medical bag.

Speaker 1 (08:08):
Yes, wouldn't that have been a sign? Don't you think
He's like, let's go on a hike, but I'm just
gonna bring my my anesthesiologists bag with me.

Speaker 3 (08:16):
Wow.

Speaker 2 (08:17):
So, so he's attempting to inject her with something?

Speaker 3 (08:20):
Yes, so too. Yes, So she's awesome.

Speaker 1 (08:24):
I know she's a badass.

Speaker 3 (08:25):
I should have pushed him off the cliff.

Speaker 1 (08:27):
I do not know what was in the syringe, but
Gerhardt is an antithesiologist and has access to several potentially
lethal medications as part of his employment, she wrote in
this court filing. Ultimately, the doctor who's the husband, grabbed
a rock and began to pound her in the head.
Miss Koenig told police that he also grabbed her hair
and smashed her face into the ground. Luckily for her,

(08:48):
there were two women farther down the trail that interview
that intervened, and they told police that they heard a
woman screaming for help. One of the women told police
that she ran ahead and saw a man hitting a
woman in the head with a rock. He is trying
to kill me.

Speaker 3 (09:01):
The woman holding a medical bag.

Speaker 1 (09:02):
Yes, a man with a medical bag and a syringe,
close to the edge of a cliff on a trail
was beating her over the head with a rock. They
shouted that they were calling nine to one one and
the man fled. The women then helped Miss Koenig down
the trail. I like that he flees like no one's
going to know what's him.

Speaker 2 (09:23):
Hopefully they won't be identify my wife won't be able
to identify me.

Speaker 1 (09:27):
Police pull out an all points bulletin for doctor Koenig
and shut down the area around the look at and
trails during a multi hour manhunt. He was found and
taken into custody about six pm that evening. In the interim,
Miss Koenig said she learned that doctor Koenig had called
one of his adult children. So he has adult children
with a different wife. I guess he called.

Speaker 3 (09:47):
They have a children together, they two, they have two.

Speaker 1 (09:49):
Young children together, and they were married for six years.
But apparently he called one of his adult children via FaceTime.
Allegedly he was covered in blood and said I just
tried to kill Ari, but she got away.

Speaker 3 (10:03):
Yeah, can you can you be my alibi?

Speaker 1 (10:07):
It's I hate that I'm laughing at this, but.

Speaker 3 (10:09):
This is well, if she didn't survive, we certainly no.

Speaker 1 (10:13):
But she she survived.

Speaker 3 (10:14):
So I mean not she didn't sur write without any trauma, right.

Speaker 1 (10:17):
Ms Koonig wrote that she is afraid for herself. Well,
that seems obvious at this point, her children and the
rest of her family if her husband is released on bail.
His bail has been set at five million, and he
is expected back in court on March thirty first for
preliminary hearing. I find this case so interesting that I
feel like we might have to do a follow up
after his March thirty first preliminary hearing. I just clearly

(10:40):
poorly executed, clearly not well thought out, or he underestimated
how strong Yea his wife is. I think he thought
he was just going to be able to push her
off the edge really easily.

Speaker 3 (10:51):
So my goodness, all right.

Speaker 1 (10:54):
That to get into the bulk of what do.

Speaker 3 (10:57):
We know the motive? I you know, I have a.

Speaker 1 (11:00):
I assumed that there was a mistress because when I
was reading and it said he facetimed, I thought it
was going to say he facetimed his mistress. But it
wasn't his mistress.

Speaker 2 (11:07):
It was but his daughter wasn't in on it or
anything or there's no no, not known anything about.

Speaker 1 (11:12):
That, not that we know of right now, although it
makes me speculate because he called the adult child and
said like she got away basically, so I don't know
if other people were involved in this plot. We shall
stay tuned and let you know of any updates on
this case. But Shane is not taking me to Maui

(11:33):
or Uah anytime soon. I refuse to go all right,
all right, let's get out. Have to be more creative, Yeah,
to think of something better than that. Okay, let's get
into the bulk of this episode. We really wanted to
do the Brian Coburger case, which is the Idaho student murders.
I've had tons and tons of you guys out there

(11:54):
that have been listening to legally Brunette thank you by
the way, dming me and asking us to go through it.
So he he does go on trials soon. I believe
it's August eleventh, So this will be just an episode
of the background, the facts, the evidence, where we're at currently,
and then we hope to most likely follow the trial
once he goes to trial. Let's do a little bit

(12:17):
of the background of this case. Let's just give us
some background information so we're all on the same page.
So in the early hours of November thirteenth and twenty
twenty two, University of Idaho students. It was Kaylee Gonkalvius
who was twenty one, Madison Mogan twenty one, Xana Kernodle
twenty and Ethan Chapin twenty.

Speaker 3 (12:35):
How many lived in the house.

Speaker 1 (12:36):
So there were five girls that lived within the house.
Ethan was staying the night with his girlfriend Xana, he
did not live in the home, and then there were
the two survivors. So on this night, on November thirteenth,
twenty twenty two, there were four college students were murdered
and they're off campus residents. Thirty year old Brian Koberger
has been accused of the murders and is being charged

(12:57):
with four counts of first degree murder and one count
of burglary. At his arraignment, he did not I don't
know if you knew this, But when they asked him
how he pleaded, he just he stayed silent. So the
judge entered a not guilty plea on his behalf.

Speaker 2 (13:12):
He should have entered it guilty plea. If you don't
say anything, then you're gonna be guilty. Yeah, but it's
and it would be easy. Then you just sent in something.

Speaker 1 (13:19):
Yeah, but I feel I feel like that's unconstitutional. I
don't know.

Speaker 3 (13:23):
I wasn't talking about legality. Oh, I'm sorry, guys, clearly
a nut murder.

Speaker 1 (13:30):
Well, he is innocent until proven guilty, so we have
to we have to stick with that. If convicted, he
could face the death penalty and Idaho. Also, I know,
I don't know if he read.

Speaker 3 (13:43):
This method of death penalty in Idaho.

Speaker 1 (13:45):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (13:45):
I didn't look that up, but I'm going to look
it up. Okay, look up it's important facts.

Speaker 1 (13:49):
Yeah, I really need to prepare myself for all the questions.
I don't know what. I don't know what would it be?

Speaker 3 (13:56):
Chair?

Speaker 1 (13:56):
Electric chair or lethal injection? Aren't those the only two methods?

Speaker 3 (14:01):
Firing squad?

Speaker 1 (14:02):
They do use the firing squad.

Speaker 2 (14:03):
You t use the firing squad. There was someone that
was executed this month. I think I don't remember what
state that shows the firing squad.

Speaker 3 (14:11):
Oh wow, that's what I would choose.

Speaker 1 (14:13):
You would choose the firing squad.

Speaker 2 (14:14):
Yeah, well, I would choose not to commit crimes that
are first choice. I've thought about this. You stand there
with a blindfold. Yeah, right, you don't really know what's
going on, and it's.

Speaker 1 (14:25):
Just you don't know what's going on.

Speaker 3 (14:28):
I guess you.

Speaker 2 (14:29):
Don't see what's going on, right, Like like the lethal
injection is there's too many steps.

Speaker 1 (14:35):
I don't understand why there's.

Speaker 2 (14:36):
Strapping you down. There's multiple injections. They you know, all
this stuff and it's like a slow process to your death. Okay,
firing squad, I go stand there, there's ten armed men
that stand in front of you, or however many there is,
only one has a bullet. I don't know how that
really helps their conscious but yeah, that way, you don't

(14:56):
know who did it. That's the same with the electric share.
There was multiple, which is and you flipped.

Speaker 3 (15:01):
Him and you didn't know which one did it.

Speaker 1 (15:03):
Why is that supposed to protect the person firing?

Speaker 2 (15:06):
Yeah, so maybe they have some conscience of well, I
don't know if it was me they killed them, which
is like, but I was willing to point a gun
at them and pull the trigger. Anyway, it's just one
quick shot in the heart and.

Speaker 3 (15:16):
That's it and it's over.

Speaker 1 (15:18):
Yeah, so that's what you would shoot.

Speaker 2 (15:19):
Yeah, firing squad is now the primary method of execution,
and lethal injection is an alternative.

Speaker 1 (15:25):
See that was right, that's crazy to me, all right.
There were two survivors from that night. The roommates were
Dylan Mortenson and Bethany Funk. They were home at the
time of the murders. There's a lot of interesting things
are going with that. We're going to get more in

(15:47):
detail into that so the events of that night. After
a busy Saturday night out, all the roommates were back
at the house by approximately two am the morning of
November thirteenth. Kernodle and Shapen, they're the ones that are dating,
had been at a party at a frat house, and
Matty Mogan and gun Calves were at a local bar.
Then they stopped at a food truck. It was called

(16:08):
the grub Truck. I actually was very interested in the
food truck.

Speaker 3 (16:11):
I know, I knew the food truck would catch you.

Speaker 1 (16:13):
Yeah, I did for a late night snack. And there's
actually video surveillance on the food truck because they I
guess what they do. They put it onto TikTok or
something like all the it's like a like a marketing
a marketing thing for them. So there was actually very clear.

Speaker 2 (16:27):
Footage of provide security. They might document in case someone steals.

Speaker 1 (16:30):
Someone seals tacos. Come again, right, If I was ever
going to commit a crime, it would be something It would.

Speaker 3 (16:39):
Be sealing eating someone's it would be eating.

Speaker 1 (16:41):
Somebody else's tacos. Yeah. Xana Kernodle briefly left her room
to grab a door dash order at around four a m.
According to court documentary.

Speaker 2 (16:50):
You know, it's really funny that all these things nowadays
provide a digital footprint like door dash, you know, ring camera, yes,
door dash, even the food truck has apparently is live
streaming or whatever.

Speaker 1 (17:02):
I do know, honestly, I was thinking about this in
this case because the digital footprint is so interesting on
how they tracked Brian Coberger back to this crime, and
it made me think it's really difficult to commit crimes now.

Speaker 2 (17:15):
Well, certain crimes apparently you can push someone off a cliff.

Speaker 3 (17:19):
As well as you're.

Speaker 1 (17:22):
On these trails.

Speaker 2 (17:24):
Everything here is going to be like modern day like tracking, right, That's.

Speaker 3 (17:28):
How they got to Ghettle.

Speaker 1 (17:29):
So the third floor of the house house gone Calvez
and her dog in one room, and then Mogan was
in another bedroom. Yet the night when the murders occurred,
the two of them were sleeping in the same bed
when they were murdered, and the dog was in the
other room. Cernodle and Shapin were on the second floor,
and so was Mortensen, and Mortenson was the one that lived.

(17:51):
According to the affidavit, Funk was alone occupant on the
first floor, where the front door was Around four am
Mortenson woke up to noises up stairs, and she told
police she thought gon Kalviz was playing with her dog
on the third floor. Then she heard crying coming from
the direction of Kernodle's room and looked outside once more.

(18:11):
From above, she then felt like she heard a male
voice that was in shape and saying something to the
effect of it's okay, I'm going to help you. This
is all according to the affidavit that was filed, it's
not clear where the male's voice was coming from. Mortensen
heard crying again and open the door. I think this
is the third time. She opens the door, and this

(18:31):
time when she opens the door, she sees a figure
clad in black clothing with a mask covering their mouth
and nose, walking forward towards her. Then she freezes, is
what she says. She's just stand there shot and he
walks past her and goes out the sliding door. Mortensen

(18:51):
froze and the person walked past her.

Speaker 2 (18:53):
That begs questions, Well, there's a lot of which we
don't have answers. Why didn't he attack her, right? You know,
he probably knew he was covered so she couldn't identify him,
so maybe, but but why did he kill someone not
the others?

Speaker 3 (19:07):
Right?

Speaker 2 (19:08):
Maybe that wasn't part of the plan, Like she sprung
on him and he thought, so, this wasn't part of
his plan. He thought he already executed everything, and then
he didn't want to improvise his you know, a fifth murder.

Speaker 1 (19:19):
Right around four seventeen am, a security camera less than
fifty feet from Kernodle's bedroom wall picked up distorted audio
of what sounded like voices or a whimper followed by
a loud thud. According to the Affid David, a dog
can also be heard barking. Okay, I have a lot
of questions about what happened that night.

Speaker 3 (19:35):
The dog did not die.

Speaker 1 (19:36):
Correct, No, the dog did not die.

Speaker 3 (19:38):
So what did the dog provide a statement?

Speaker 1 (19:40):
The dog did not provide a statement. I have so
many questions though. First of all, let me just ask you,
do you think he was targeting all of the students
in that house or do you think he went in
to kill one and then was surprised that they were
sharing a bedroom, and then he felt like he had
to kill the other one, and then maybe he heard
some the noises and then had to go to the

(20:01):
other room and kill them and then was surprised that
there was a boyfriend there and then had to kill him.
And he ends up killing four people, but only but
not with the intent to kill all the Do you
know what I mean?

Speaker 3 (20:10):
I have no idea how, but I know what he
was thinking.

Speaker 1 (20:13):
I don't know, but I'm just that's what goes on simplify.

Speaker 2 (20:16):
You're saying, was he trying to kill one person and
then Moore got mixed in them?

Speaker 1 (20:19):
Yeah, because the two girls were sharing a room and
they normally don't share a room. So my question is
was he targeting one of those girls? Possibly he comes
into the house, he comes in clad in black, he
has the knife, he kills one of the girls, and
then he's like, and then there's another one in the
bed they're sleeping in the end, was.

Speaker 3 (20:38):
He stalking one of them? Do we know that?

Speaker 1 (20:40):
We don't know that. I did read that apparently Brian
Coberger was a vegan and he frequented a Greek restaurant
where Maddie and Kayley worked. And we assume, or I've
read it somewhere, there's some assumption that he or allegedly
he was following them on instant and I had read somewhere,

(21:02):
and if anyone is out there listening and you you're
more clear on this. I know that I have read
somewhere that they did find some DMS. Not that she
had answered, but he had DMed her just kind of like, hey,
what's up, like slid into I can't remember if it
was Maddie or Kaylee, but had slid into.

Speaker 3 (21:17):
Their Nonetheless, there's some connection.

Speaker 2 (21:20):
He saw two of the girls at some restaurant that
he frequented, and then he he there was a connection
on Instagram to him and the household.

Speaker 1 (21:28):
Right, So my question is, and I know I'm.

Speaker 2 (21:31):
Into So they didn't go to the same school or anything,
They had no other ties together.

Speaker 1 (21:35):
No, he was he was a PhD student in Washington State,
and then they were all Idaho University of Idaho students
like undergrad and he was in the PhD program and
criminology elsewhere elsewhere. Okay, First of all, I also have
to say that this case, me reading this case and
researching this case, I didn't realize how bad a geography

(21:58):
I am because I had no idea that Washington State
bordered Idaho. I know you're looking at me like I'm
an idiot, but I did not know that Idaho had
that top part that goes up.

Speaker 3 (22:12):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (22:13):
Yeah, it's like a chimney that goes up and borders Washington.
Because when I kept reading that they were only like
ten miles apart, these two college campuses, one in Washington
State and one in Idaho, I'm like, how are they
ten miles apart? How is Washington ten miles from Idaho?
Apparently they border each other and I didn't even know

(22:33):
that anyway. Back, I just had to throw that in there.

Speaker 2 (22:38):
Legally, Brunette, it's not geography, Brunette exactly.

Speaker 1 (22:41):
I had no idea anyway. Apparently he had frequently topography topography.

Speaker 3 (22:47):
Geography is more like the rocks in the lands.

Speaker 1 (22:51):
Okay, anyway, now I know they order each other. He
apparently had followed these girls on Instagram and had DMed
one of them a few times, so he knew who
they were. I would be under the assumption that he
possibly followed them home and that's how he knew where
they lived.

Speaker 3 (23:09):
Yeah, at some point I'm sure he did.

Speaker 2 (23:10):
Yeah, right, If it was targeted, then he had to
have done that.

Speaker 1 (23:13):
So then back to my question was did he target
one of the girls or both the girls? And then
end up killing four people that night because he wasn't
aware that there were so many people up at that
time or whatever. Anyway, what's interesting is I feel like
a lot of these gaps in this case will be
filled in when he goes to trial. All Right, So
at four twenty am, Mortensen started frantically calling her roommates Kernodle, Gone, Kalvez,

(23:37):
then back to Kernodle again. She called Mogan, that's Mattie
Mogan again before texting Bethany Funk. Bethany Funk is another
one that is does not perish that night, and she
says no one is answering. Bethany then had also tried
calling Maddie and Kaylee and Shapin. During that time, Kaylee

(23:57):
Mortensen texted to her what's going on? The text message
remained unanswered. Investigators believe the four roommates were killed sometime
between four am and four twenty five AM. So basically
there's the door dash order at four, then there's some noises.
They're texting their roommates asking them what's going on. Then
at four to twenty five. I believe they know a

(24:18):
four twenty five because this is when they catch the
white Alantra on surveillance video leaving at a rapid rate
from their house. Yeah, so he basically entered the home
murdered four people with a k bar knife within a
twenty minute timeframe.

Speaker 3 (24:36):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (24:37):
I mean, I guess, well, it has to be I mean,
I hate song and on two different floors. It has
to be kind of quick because people are going to run, right,
so kind of. I mean, he's gruesome anyway, clearly he's
a nut, so it's not you, and I think, like,
that's horrific.

Speaker 3 (24:53):
I could never do that in twenty minutes.

Speaker 2 (24:55):
But he had to do it quick otherwise others would
wake up, call the police, they would run.

Speaker 3 (25:01):
So I had to be executed really quickly.

Speaker 1 (25:03):
Okay, here's my other question, and this is another thing
that goes on in my head. There's four people. There's
two in a room, two in another room. They had
to have been so intoxicated that they didn't make a
lot of noise.

Speaker 2 (25:16):
I mean, I know it's college and this and nan,
you know they're out getting isolated.

Speaker 1 (25:22):
No, I mean they were out, both of them. One
was at a frat The two were at a frat party.
The other one was at a bar. I mean, clearly
they were.

Speaker 2 (25:28):
Intoxicated, okay, level of intoxication.

Speaker 1 (25:32):
But I'm just saying for a man to overcome two
girls and then to move to another bedroom and a
girl and her boyfriend with little to no noise, I mean,
the other two that are survivors, they don't hear screaming,
they don't hear fighting, they don't there's not furniture being overturned.

Speaker 3 (25:49):
I don't know, I haven't.

Speaker 1 (25:50):
I mean, all they here is some slight whimpering voice.

Speaker 2 (25:55):
I remember in the beginning, I had the prejudgment of, oh,
they're probably wasted and they want some time.

Speaker 3 (26:00):
People don't want to call the cops because they'll say they.

Speaker 2 (26:01):
Had drugs in their system or pot or whatever. And
the other one is they were just kind of not
all there to be able to quickly react and they
probably just went back to sleep.

Speaker 1 (26:10):
So you're saying just the alcohol level on all four
of them probably led to him being able to eat
A loss one scenario, because I'm just thinking about the
girlfriend and the boyfriend in the room together and the
bed together, and if he slips into the room and
he's murdering, he's got to murder one. What is the
other one doing. I mean, maybe they're passed out they
don't notice it.

Speaker 3 (26:30):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (26:31):
I'm just gonna tell you. If someone is murdering me
and we're in bed together, I need you to fight back.

Speaker 3 (26:36):
I'll try to wake up.

Speaker 1 (26:36):
Can you please get up and do something? All right?
All right?

Speaker 3 (26:40):
Do you mean save him? He'd probably beat the crap
out of him.

Speaker 1 (26:43):
Probably.

Speaker 3 (26:44):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (26:44):
Anyway, let's get back to these text messages. So there's
a lot of text messages going on between the two
surviving roommates and the four that are upstairs in the
second and third floor of the house. Bethany replies yeah, dude, wtf,
with Mortensen describing some one in quote like a ski
mask almost so she's so, she's actually texting the other

(27:07):
roommate saying that she saw someone in a ski mask
in the house.

Speaker 3 (27:11):
Yeah, and I could see her not wanting to leave
her room.

Speaker 2 (27:14):
Yeah I would. I don't know if I would. I mean,
that's pretty frightening. And plus, these homes are like they're
designed for college students, I think probably, so they're probably
like hallways and rooms are separated, not like a traditional
home where there's like a new big front entrance.

Speaker 3 (27:28):
And it's open, so I imagine.

Speaker 2 (27:31):
It was apartment like and they were hiding in their room.

Speaker 1 (27:42):
So the two remaining roommates that are alive continued texting
back and forth about the man in the hall. There's
a lot of typos because you can tell they're panicked, right,
They're just like you know, Bethany says to Dylan, possibly
intoxicated and intoxicated right stfu. This is after she tells
her that she saw a man in a ski mask,
like he had something over his head, forehead and little mouth.

(28:06):
I'm not kidding. I'm so freaked out, so am I.
Then Bethany indicated her phone was about to die, and
so she texted come to my room, which was below
this is on the first floor, and then she texts run.
So the defense claims in court documents that Dylan, ultimately,
so Dylan is the one that saw the man. Dylan's

(28:27):
the one that opens the door like three different times,
and on the third time when she opens the door,
that's when she sees the guy walk by in the
ski mask. Okay, then she's the one that texts to
Bethany on the first floor and says, I saw a
man in a ski mask. And she's like WTF. Then
she says, come down to my room. Run. So then
Dylan ends up going to Bethany's room and the two

(28:47):
of them stay the night on the first floor together.
They launch another round of calls to their roommates at
four twenty seven without an answer, and we know, based
on the timeline already, that their roommates were dead at
this time. They're calling them, texting them for twenty seven
please answer, Dylan texts to the roommates upstairs at four

(29:09):
thirty two am. Prosecutors have indicated that they plan to
use the testimony of the two surviving roommates and want
to use their text messages to illustrate the timeline of
the night. I know that the roommates aren't We know
they're not involved, but I don't understand, and I'm trying
to give them grace here, but I don't understand how
you see a man in your house walk by you

(29:32):
in a ski mask well, and your roommates are not
answering or replying, and you go down to your roommate's
room and you stay the night in the room.

Speaker 2 (29:41):
I don't think the issue is one ran to the
other's room. The issue is then Chappelle asleep.

Speaker 1 (29:46):
No, they're up there.

Speaker 3 (29:48):
There's a whole stay. No, no, the girl one girl
went to the other girl's room.

Speaker 2 (29:53):
Yes, stayed the night, stayed the night. Yes, I said,
how long were they was till the police war notified?

Speaker 1 (29:59):
Yeah, the stays the whole night. And there's a whole
a digital background. I mean on their phones. They have
it of them like they one gets on LinkedIn and
then they're on Snapchat, and then they're on Instagram, and
then they're back on Snapchat.

Speaker 2 (30:12):
Writs a lot of questions like what the heck? Then
they went to resume to normal behaviors. They just go
back to their regular you know, Instagram and whatever.

Speaker 1 (30:21):
I don't know. That's the part where I'm confused. And
then one of them, I don't remember which one wakes
up in the morning at seven am and calls their
mom or calls their dad, and then calls their dad back,
and then the dad calls. Here's my question, and this
is another thing that will come out at trial, I
assume because we don't know this, But what was the
conversation when she called her home? She she has a

(30:43):
conversation with her dad at like seven or eight in
the morning after an after a Saturday night out drinking someone,
they see a mass man in the house. Their roommates
aren't answering. Then she has a phone conversation with her dad.
Was what was in that conversation because they end up
not calling nine one until someone else comes over to
the house at noon.

Speaker 3 (31:04):
Okay, so clearly they didn't go into the victim's.

Speaker 1 (31:06):
Rooms, no or yell or yell up for them.

Speaker 2 (31:09):
Well, they tried to call them and no one answered.

Speaker 1 (31:13):
But I'm saying, they're all in the same house. It's level.
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (31:16):
Why don't they open the door and be like, hey,
maybe they just all kind of had their own space
and they just didn't they thought, Okay, they're sleeping with
some guy.

Speaker 3 (31:23):
On the mask. I don't know. I don't know how
what the dynamic is. Is that normal behavior for them?
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (31:30):
Is it normal behavior to see someone in a mask
ski mask walking around in your house?

Speaker 3 (31:34):
No? No?

Speaker 1 (31:36):
All right, Well, we know that the defense is clearly
going to point out that while they're not being able
to get a hold of their roommates and that they
saw a mask man intruder in their house, that they
don't call like.

Speaker 3 (31:49):
They're gonna get a discredit.

Speaker 2 (31:50):
Clearly, maybe this didn't happen because if people saw a
masked man in the home, they would call the police.

Speaker 3 (31:56):
They instead went on LinkedIn and went to bed, So
clearly chat and so yeah, is their testimony credible? Right,
But there's more evidence.

Speaker 1 (32:05):
There's a lot more evidence, I'd say, And I'm not
questioning their honesty as to like they're just respond I'm
just questioning. I just I don't understand in what world
you see an intruder in your home when you're a
college student, you can't get a hold of your roommates,
you're scared, and you don't call the police. That's the

(32:28):
part that I don't understand. But then again, I don't know.
I've never been in a situation where that happens. So
maybe there is some kind of fight or flight thing
that goes on and you are in shock. I don't know.
A transcript of the Surviving Roommates nine to one one
call was also released, and the transcript shows the case

(32:48):
what it was at eleven fifty six, am.

Speaker 3 (32:52):
Oh my gosh, like at noon the next day.

Speaker 1 (32:54):
Yes, that's what I just keep saying. Yes, it was
eight It was eight hours after the murders took place.
That was finally called what time they wake up? No,
I just told you. One of them was awake at
seven I believe it was seven am and she was
making phone calls to her dad.

Speaker 2 (33:10):
She just stayed awake for four hours before she called,
four or five hours.

Speaker 1 (33:14):
They might have fallen asleep in there a little bit. Yeah,
they for an hour or so.

Speaker 3 (33:18):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (33:19):
That's why I'm saying the trial will be very interesting
because I feel like a lot of these questions and
these gaps.

Speaker 3 (33:23):
Yeah, we're going to witnesses.

Speaker 1 (33:25):
They're going to be witnesses, and it will be really
interesting to hear these gaps filled in. What was the
conversation about what was your mental state during that time?
Why did you not?

Speaker 2 (33:35):
There is going to try to poke holes in that.
But there's still DNA evidence, yes, and there's his car
roaming around the cellular usage.

Speaker 1 (33:47):
Right, all right, let's get to how Brian was actually caught.
So the DNA evidence in this case is really interesting
to me. So they found a knife sheath that was
left behind, and again the knife she is interesting to
me because Brian allegedly shows up. He murders four people.
He's a criminals he's working on his PhD in criminology.

(34:08):
So we're not talking about someone that's.

Speaker 2 (34:11):
I'm going to talk about a low level and experienced,
uneducated murder.

Speaker 1 (34:15):
You're talking about someone who's crime and crime scene is
their passion. And I don't know how you show up
to a murder you have You have a knife, that's it.
You have a ski mask and a knife. And how
you leave the knife sheath behind when that's all you're carrying.
It's not like you have a purse and a wallet
and a backpack and a bunch of stuff that you're handling. Well,

(34:38):
I mean maybe he did.

Speaker 3 (34:39):
He's also committing four murders.

Speaker 1 (34:40):
That's a lot.

Speaker 3 (34:41):
Yeah, it's kind of hard to maybe manage your yeah, multitask, right.

Speaker 1 (34:46):
So the knife sheath on this k bar knife which
I actually looked up an image of it. It's a
big knife.

Speaker 3 (34:52):
Yeah, it's like a knife.

Speaker 1 (34:53):
It is, it's it's the knife sheath itself, says.

Speaker 3 (34:56):
Usmc on it.

Speaker 2 (34:57):
I had that knife and this house, like let's say
it just bought one and I had it. You would
quickly identify as what the heck is this knife? Where
did you get it?

Speaker 3 (35:06):
Why do we have? What do you need it for?
It's not like it would just get mixed with all
or other the kitchen knife, right, No, But.

Speaker 2 (35:12):
I mean it's it's not It's not to say there's
not a reason to have the knife. It's not like, oh,
if you have the knife, you're a murderer. But it's
not a typical knife to have, and so you better
have an explanation for it.

Speaker 3 (35:24):
Yeah. If I had the knife in the home and
you asked about it, he's like, Oh, I don't know.
I just thought it was kind of cool.

Speaker 2 (35:27):
It was on sale, Like, it doesn't make sense. You
would be like, what's the reason for this knife?

Speaker 3 (35:33):
Right?

Speaker 2 (35:34):
And I could say collecting, hunting, but I'd have to
have a reason. It's not just you never know, I
just got a knife. So what's his reasoning? Because there's
history he bought that. He bought that same knife too, Do.

Speaker 3 (35:47):
You know that? Yes?

Speaker 1 (35:48):
And I was going to get to that, but that
is more of the evidence that they have against him.
They did find through his digital footprint he purchased the
knife with the sheaf and the knife sharpener.

Speaker 3 (36:00):
Were they separate items?

Speaker 1 (36:01):
Yeah? On Amazon, and I believe he I believe they
were purchased eight months prior to the murder.

Speaker 2 (36:08):
Yes, that sounds about right, But I know that the
Amazon account is a family account, and so there's issues
with expectation of privacy from the others. And it's also well,
who bought the knife?

Speaker 3 (36:20):
But that's the thing. He needs to have an explanation
for that knife. Yeah, yeah, he does.

Speaker 2 (36:27):
You mean if he wants to explain his reason, Like
if I'm at the scene of a crime about the
times of the murder, but I didn't commit the murder, well,
I'm going to have an explanation as.

Speaker 3 (36:38):
To why I was there. He has to have an
explanation as to why. Oh and the what's the knife
cover called a sheath? A sheath, so the sheath? Does
he have the sheath.

Speaker 2 (36:50):
Or does he only have the knife or neither? So
if he an explanation, here, an explanation for why he
bought the knife, an explanation as to if he doesn't
have the knie because he liked to throw it out right,
he's hiding it's evidence.

Speaker 3 (37:03):
Yeah, and the.

Speaker 1 (37:04):
Sheath Okay, but we're gonna get more into this knife
because there's new evidence that has come out recently.

Speaker 3 (37:09):
Okay, we'll tell me.

Speaker 1 (37:10):
Okay that this is why the defense is trying to
suppress his Amazon his digital footprint is Amazon purchase because
apparently after the murders, he was looking for a replacement
knife because the knife was never found.

Speaker 2 (37:24):
Well, someone on the Amazon account was looking for the knife. Oh,
so the thinking is, oh, my gosh, I better have
a new knife to kind of explain that.

Speaker 3 (37:34):
See.

Speaker 2 (37:34):
Look, there's no blood on here, there's no anything this
and I have the sheath that's you know, and everything.

Speaker 1 (37:39):
So the sheath is found in the bed, and the
sheath has some DNA on it on the on the
button part of the sheath. The knife has never been found.
I've read, I've heard of thought. I've heard people say
that possibly he got rid of the murder weapon and
that drive between going yeah, probably because I guess you
pass a river it's called Snake River or something that

(38:00):
he could have thrown it into the river. Now there's
new evidence that's come forward that the defense is obviously
trying to suppress. But it's that he after the murders,
was looking at that same k bar knife. So if
the knife is missing and the sheath was found, is
he trying to purchase the knife again to say, hey,

(38:22):
I do have it. It's right here. I didn't use
it in a murder. I have it. It's in my house.

Speaker 3 (38:26):
So that's what he was trying to do.

Speaker 1 (38:28):
So there's that.

Speaker 3 (38:29):
That's why I said you have to have an explanation
for the knife or the missing knife.

Speaker 2 (38:33):
He is trying to buy it, but did he buy it? No,
it was just a search history. I think I believe
it was.

Speaker 1 (38:37):
A search history, and I don't know. I couldn't tell
if if they could tell from this digital footprint if
it was purchased, or they can only tell that he
was looking at it in order.

Speaker 3 (38:49):
Well, I mean.

Speaker 1 (38:51):
Speculation.

Speaker 2 (38:51):
We're speculating, and an argument could be made someone in
the household was looking at it, maybe because he took
the knife, and someone.

Speaker 1 (38:57):
Else where maybe because the dagerating.

Speaker 3 (38:58):
About my knife is missing. I'm going to get a
new one. The son, did you you borrowed my knife?
Did you? I needed to put it back? Yeah? Wow,
all right, so just wait to you know, this is
where I get it beyond a reasonable doubt. But there's
so many coincidences where it's like this is not normal.

Speaker 2 (39:17):
Now you're purchasing the same knife and yours is missing,
and you're driving around these girls' homes.

Speaker 3 (39:25):
I mean, it's just so not I don't know.

Speaker 1 (39:29):
Well, he's innocent until proven guilty, but let's just keep going.
Because there is DNA that's found on the knife sheath.
The DNA in this in this case is really interesting
to me because they ran the DNA into the national
FBI database, which is COTIS, and they get no hits.

Speaker 2 (39:44):
Yeah, because he's never had a crime before, right to
be in the system.

Speaker 1 (39:47):
Right. So it says the first investigator submitted the DNA
to the FBI database CODIS, but when that didn't turn
up a match, investigators turned to genetic genealogy. It actually
has a name which is really interesting. It's called IgG.
It's investigated genetic genealogy. And I think this is going
to be something that's more prevalent because now there's all
these DNA databases like twenty three and meters and these

(40:07):
heritage databases. And what they did was they took the
DNA and because they got no hits and CODIS, they
ran it through it.

Speaker 3 (40:14):
They found family members.

Speaker 1 (40:15):
They found family members in these genealogy databases, and they
got a hit with the dad. I believe. Then I
think they followed him because he takes a road trip
after the murders are committed. He and his dad take
a road trip in December and they drive from Washington,
where he goes to college in this PhD criminology program.
They drive his white Alantra to Pennsylvania where his family

(40:40):
home is. I believe the police followed him or kept
track of him somehow they knew that he was going
to be home in Pennsylvania. And then they go through
the trash and they find more DNA and they make
a match, so they're using this genealogy type of genetic
DNA research. They get the dad, there's a hit, They
find his FAMI family, They follow him to his family home.

(41:02):
They go through the trash again. There's no expectation of
privacy and trash, right, you put trash out on the
side of the road.

Speaker 2 (41:09):
It's not an illegal circh. I read something. Yeah, once
you put it in the trash, it's fair game. But
I think I read something that they use the trash
service to go collect the trash because it was in
a gated community, and I guess police didn't have the
ability to get in or they just chose to have
the garbage person go and like retrieve it, like hey,

(41:31):
give us that trash over there. And so then the
idea is, yeah, is there an expectation of privacy or something?

Speaker 3 (41:38):
You know, I think that's going to fall flat.

Speaker 1 (41:40):
But yeah, you know, I do know. The defense filed
a motion to suppress or to throw out the evidence
with the genealogy, and that's also going to be another issue.
I know they've hired they've brought someone onto the defense
team which is an expert in the DNA and the
genealogy and all that, because they're going to try and
definitely use that to tear apart but to.

Speaker 2 (41:58):
Do what I mean, DNA's DNA. So what's the argument
to be made?

Speaker 1 (42:02):
I you know, because they're gonna they're going to try
and say that they you know, didn't do the right things,
They didn't test it enough. Was there tainted in the testing?
I don't know, you know, but.

Speaker 2 (42:13):
It was the DNA on the knife cover was trace
evidence or trace DNA, meaning he just put his thumbprint
and just left some DNA. It wasn't blood, so you
can't It's not very easy to transfer trace DNA from
one source to another without any other DNA also being
put on there.

Speaker 3 (42:33):
Yeah, so that's I think that's going to fall flat too.

Speaker 2 (42:36):
I think they're going to try to poke all these holes,
but I don't think anyone's going to buy it.

Speaker 1 (42:40):
I do believe that in these preliminary motions they tried
to they filed emotion to suppress the genealogy part of
it the DNA because they were saying it was unconstitutional.
But the question is, is when you give your DNA
to these databases.

Speaker 3 (42:59):
Is it public?

Speaker 2 (42:59):
Is does it expectation and privacy remain when I submit
my saliva for a DNA test?

Speaker 1 (43:07):
Right? And I believe what the judge said is when
you're when you're giving your DNA to a third party,
there's no expectation of privacy.

Speaker 3 (43:14):
No, you're in a freaking database.

Speaker 1 (43:16):
Right, all right. Investigators then built a family tree of
hundreds of relatives using the same tools and methods used
by members of the public who wish to learn more
about their ancestors. So this is how so. The FBI

(43:36):
investigators then sent local law enforcement a tip to investigate Coburger.
After law enforcement obtained the DNA from Coburger's father and
later they got a cheek swab from Coburger, which I
assume they got a warrant at that point. At that
point to get the cheap the cheek swab from him directly.
I assume they submitted an affidavit with all of these things,

(43:56):
as far as the DNA on the sheaf, the genealogy
it hit on the dad, They got the you know,
the DNA from the trash, It all matched. And now
they got a cheek swamp from Coburger, and they found
that there was a statistical match showing it was overwhelmingly
likely that the DNA found on the knife sheath match Coburger's.
So that's where the DNA came to play. We talked

(44:18):
about this a little bit, but let's just make this
Let's just go into a little more detail about his
purchases prior to the murders. The state has revealed new evidence.
It plans to present a trial that includes a purchase
record from Dick's Sporting Goods that prosecutors say shows that
Coburger bought the black And I didn't know what this was.
I never heard of this before, but I guess this
ski mask he had on is called Bala clava.

Speaker 3 (44:38):
It has an opening, fat eyes. It doesn't have like.

Speaker 1 (44:41):
Two circles, right, So I actually googled that because I
never heard of it before, and it showed up on Revolve.
So Revolved, which I ordered from eight thousand times a
day Carrie's.

Speaker 3 (44:52):
So they sell a murder kit.

Speaker 1 (44:54):
They sell murder kits on Revolve, and.

Speaker 3 (44:57):
They have a good return policy. They have an.

Speaker 1 (44:59):
Amazing return So he could have worn it, yeah, returned
it that night, put it back in the box, put
the shipping label on, and sent the mass back.

Speaker 2 (45:07):
And I think one of the uh surviving roommates she
drew what kind of mask he wore.

Speaker 1 (45:14):
She did match that type exactly. It's that open, just
like you said.

Speaker 3 (45:19):
The one ninja. You look like a ninja, right, So.

Speaker 1 (45:22):
The same type of mass was described by a surviving roommate,
and she also, like you just said, in a police sketch,
she claimed she saw a man wearing a black ski
mask inside the King Rode home the night of the killings.
She also said that she could tell that he had
bushy eyebrows.

Speaker 3 (45:36):
Yeah, which that.

Speaker 1 (45:37):
Comes into play later because apparently he took a selfie
the morning after the murders.

Speaker 3 (45:42):
And does he not have bushy eyebrows. He does, Oh
he does? He shaved him or something.

Speaker 1 (45:47):
No, no, So this a selfie that he took the
morning after the murders. I believe it was like they
found it in his phone, you know, evidence that apparently
he took it around ten am or something like that.
He's like freshly showered, you know, just just committed the
perfect murder. I'm going to take a selfie as a
thumbs up, right, he has like there's like a shower
head in the background, but.

Speaker 3 (46:09):
There's a shower.

Speaker 1 (46:10):
He jumped inaid okay, Yeah, So he takes a shower,
he cleans off all the evidence, apparently allegedly, and then
he takes his selfie around ten am I believe was
the time frame. This is after the murders. He's clean,
he's got his bushy eyebrows, and he's got a thumbs up.
So I know the prosecution wants to enter this selfie

(46:31):
into evidence to show to corroborate that she said the
man she saw had bushy eyebrows, and here we have
a selfie up all close in time with the bushy eyebrows. So,
in addition, investigators found a k bar military knife sheath,
which we knew and though the knife itself is still missing,
which we think possibly he got rid of it maybe
in the river. Prosecutors say Coburger bought a k bar

(46:54):
knife eight months before the killings. So we have the
DNA evidence and we also have the car act. So
state prosecutors presented a map detailing what they say are
the times and locations Coburger's vehicle was picked up on
surveillance video near the crime scene. After reviewing several videos
obtained from the area near the crime scene, authority saw
the suspects vehicle later determined to be a twenty fifteen

(47:16):
white Hyundai Elantra multiple times between three twenty nine am
and four to twenty am on the day of the attack. So,
like we said earlier, there's ring footage of this car
and they live on this house. The murder house is
on a dead end.

Speaker 3 (47:34):
So you're definitely not driving by, right, so it's not
like you're just.

Speaker 1 (47:38):
Driving by, you're going pass, you're turning. I think they
have video surveillance of him doing a three point turn,
and then there's surveillance of him at like four twenty
five am or something leaving quickly in this car investigators
found out that Coburger had registered the twenty fifteen white
Alantra in Washington on November eighteen, five days after the killings.

(48:02):
So this is interesting because I was thinking, did he
purposefully not register his vehicle in Washington, because in Washington
then you have to have a plate on the front
and the back of the car. His car was registered
in Pennsylvania, where he's from, and he had no front
license plate. So do you think that he I mean,

(48:23):
he's a criminology major. He's getting a PhD. So I
thought he was thinking he was out smarting police by
not having a front license plate and not registering his
car in Washington.

Speaker 2 (48:33):
Yeah, but you're making a connection. He didn't register so
you wouldn't have to put a plate on. Amazing, Well,
was it criminal you would just not put a plate on,
Like all of a sudden, He's like, oh, I got
to follow the local state highway rules.

Speaker 1 (48:46):
Well, what's the what's his reasoning for waiting five days
after the murders to then register his car in Washington.

Speaker 3 (48:52):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (48:53):
I'm just saying, if you are meticulously planning a murder
and you buy the murder weapon eight months before, and
you and you purchased this ski mask, and you've gone by,
and there there is I don't know if I already
said this, but there they picked up on his cell
phone where he had driven by this residence twelve times
prior to that night. Yeah, so he's canvassing this house.

(49:16):
And every time they picked him he pinged, you know,
near their house on his phone. It was at nighttime
or early morning. So it's not like he's driving by
because he's I don't know.

Speaker 3 (49:28):
Business being on that street right in the middle of
the night.

Speaker 1 (49:31):
Right. So my point is, if this man is meticulously
planning a murdery, is a criminology.

Speaker 3 (49:39):
Oh yeah, but he still makes mistakes. He left the
knife cover, I.

Speaker 1 (49:42):
Know he made, like the most basic one. He left
the murder weapon behind, yeah, or not the weapon, but
the sheath he left it behind. I don't know. I
was just thinking that the license plate in registering the
car was probably some thought that he had that he
was evading police in some type of manner. Anyway, that's
just me.

Speaker 3 (50:02):
But again, when he goes down. You also thought Washington
and Idaho were far apart. I did.

Speaker 1 (50:06):
I thought? I thought I thought Idaho was like I
thought Idaho was in the southern United States, Like, I
thought Idaho was down by Utah. Isn't.

Speaker 3 (50:15):
Well, it touches Utah also.

Speaker 1 (50:17):
But I thought it was below Utah. I didn't really.

Speaker 3 (50:19):
Oh wow, yeah, no, way off. That's why I drive everywhere.

Speaker 2 (50:25):
Okay, that's why when you're like I'll be home in
ten minutes and it's thirty four minutes later. Where exactly,
And then you're like, I need gas again, I'm like, already,
I just drive a lot.

Speaker 3 (50:36):
Yes, you do.

Speaker 1 (50:38):
Also, I read that this is interesting. You'll find this interesting.
Are you listening? Are you paying attention? In Idaho, where
he's being tried, the state requires that if you're going
to use an alibi defense that you have to well,
you have to file that prior to the trial. I

(51:00):
want a surprise, you can't do a surprise alibi, you
have to file. So basically, defence has filed an alibi
that he was driving around the night of the murders
because he likes to look at the stars. So basically
what they've done is take the evidence that the prosecution
has and then you formulate you turn it around and
formulate an alibi around that, and it's their alibi is

(51:23):
he was alone in his car driving around, But he
does that a lot because he likes to just drive around.

Speaker 3 (51:27):
This was in November.

Speaker 2 (51:28):
I wonder if it was like overcast and stuff, because
that would be easy to be like, really, there's no stars,
it was overcast that night.

Speaker 3 (51:33):
Well, no, he drove.

Speaker 1 (51:34):
I mean he drove by their house twelve times between
June and November.

Speaker 3 (51:38):
Oh, so he's this dead end has a really good
showing of the star. Right.

Speaker 1 (51:44):
I love to drive down this dead end and look
at the stars and the hiking trails. On November thirteenth,
the suspect's phone was near his home in Pullman, Washington,
that's where he's in the PhD program at two forty
seven am, but did not appear on a network again
until approximately four forty eight am, when it was detected
near Blaine, which is south of Moscow, Idaho, where the

(52:07):
murders took place. Basically, what he has done you can
tell is he shut his phone off between two forty
seven am and four forty eight because there's no cell phone.

Speaker 3 (52:16):
Data, which is more suspicious.

Speaker 1 (52:19):
Right, So I'm saying again he's trying to elude police
by turning.

Speaker 2 (52:23):
It's like when the criminal wants to elud police and
all of a sudden they got their car like completely detailed, right,
you know, and it's like the guy will be like, yeah,
he's my neighbor. I've never seen him wash his car
in ten years, and all of a sudden he got
a detail service.

Speaker 1 (52:35):
Yeah all right. Or when there's a murder on the
carpet and they rip the carpet out, your new carpet,
yffe area, I just need a new carpet throughout the
entire house. So anyway, what he's done is he has
all this cell phone data right it's pinging, pinging, And
then between the timeframe of the murders there's no cell phone.
He turns his phone off, I know.

Speaker 3 (52:54):
And it's like when people burn a house down to
hide a murder. Yeah, it actually.

Speaker 2 (53:00):
Creates more evidence because you can see that it was
like an arson and it started over here and like
and then it's like, oh, they use this gas can,
then they can find out where the gas get was.

Speaker 3 (53:09):
Bot I always like.

Speaker 1 (53:09):
When people burn a house down to cover up a murder,
but then they find the body in the house and
it has like a bullet hole in the body and
you're like and.

Speaker 2 (53:17):
And it creates more evidence for them to find someone
because now there's an arson case.

Speaker 1 (53:21):
Oh yes, they just created it.

Speaker 3 (53:23):
They create more evidence.

Speaker 2 (53:24):
So here he is creating more evidence like turning his
phone off, which you know, kind of lets you know
what he was thinking or what he was planning, or
where it was turned off and where it was turned
back on.

Speaker 1 (53:33):
So the lack of phone data during this crucial time
period is consistent with Coburger attempting to conceal his location
during the quadruple homicide. This is what investigators determine. Less
than four hours later, between ninety twelve and nine twenty
one am, Coburger's phone was detected near the crime scene
again in Idaho, which suggests he returned to the area
after allegedly killing the four students. This is my question.

(53:55):
Did he go back to the crime scene because his
usually do, But why did he? Why did he not
turn his cell phone off? Then if he's turned his
cell phone off the night of the murders, so there's
no cell phone data, but then he goes back the
next morning, why did he not turn his cell phone
off again?

Speaker 2 (54:11):
He's he he could have simply forgot. He could alsop
the crimes already done, so they're.

Speaker 3 (54:16):
Not going to look at my data after I don't
know who knows.

Speaker 1 (54:19):
Do you think he went back to look for the
knife sheath? I mean, what's he gonna do go in
the house in the morning.

Speaker 3 (54:24):
Excuse me, excuse.

Speaker 1 (54:25):
Me, I left something.

Speaker 3 (54:27):
I don't know. I don't know, I don't know. There's
also do you think he's going to change somebody? Do
you think he's going to testify? You think this is
the kind of guy that's like, no, no.

Speaker 1 (54:38):
I tell you he won't testify because well, first of all,
I've learned that he's on the spectrum, and that's that's
a defense that they that the defense is going to
use for the weak defense.

Speaker 2 (54:46):
You know why, Well, because he's a PhD mate, he's
pursuing a PhD, and he's going to claim like I'm
not all there.

Speaker 1 (54:52):
No, I don't think they're going to use autism as
as a defense. They're going to use autism as if
he's convicted that they can't give him the death penalty
because it's and unusual unusual punishment with someone too.

Speaker 3 (55:03):
Yeah, well killing four people, and.

Speaker 1 (55:07):
I get it, but I if he's autistic, and I
do believe that I've read that he suffers with depression
and that he wrote something about not having emotions and
not being able to show emotions.

Speaker 3 (55:20):
How can you be depressed if you don't have emotions.

Speaker 1 (55:23):
Well, you can be depressed and sad. He had a
heroin addiction. I mean, he's got all kinds of Yeah,
he had a heroin addiction because apparently he was depressed,
so he did heroin. And I did read somewhere that
he wrote something online about not having feelings and emotions.
And I'm just saying, someone like that, with that kind

(55:44):
of intense stare, with no emotions, you can't put someone
on the stand like that. They're gonna come off callous
and cold. And he's got bushy eyebrows, like.

Speaker 3 (55:58):
You're you're not put someone on the stand and it's
not going to be favorable, is what you're saying.

Speaker 1 (56:03):
Yes, I'm trying to say it and a way, Yeah,
thank you for saying.

Speaker 3 (56:06):
But he might want to.

Speaker 1 (56:09):
Yeah, but the defense team at the end, well, I
mean I guess that it is up to him. Yeah,
I don't think he will. I think that they would
talk him out of it and say no way right right.
I do know because I've watched every episode of Forensic
Files that when a lot of times murderers go back

(56:32):
to the crime scene immediately because they like to they
like to.

Speaker 3 (56:35):
See their work. Yeah, you didn't have to watch the
files to know that. Well, that's the maintain thing. They
always return to the scene of the crime, right.

Speaker 1 (56:41):
And I know a lot of times when police are investigating,
they do a sweep yeah of the scene, right because
a lot of times the fine.

Speaker 3 (56:50):
Who's suspicious, who's acting odd and stuff, and they can
or who they.

Speaker 1 (56:53):
See repeatedly in the background or talking or being around anyway.

Speaker 2 (56:58):
Especially if someone like him is talking to the Oh
wasn't he like talking to the police when he got
arrested too? And he was all like casual and askaying
we should go out to coffee, and he was asking
him questions about their careers and stuff. It's like, dude,
you were just arrested for murder and you're just like
curious to know about their careers and you want to
go have cock with them to talk about things.

Speaker 1 (57:17):
Well, apparently he had applied to like the Pullman, that's
the city he lived in in Washington, Like he had
applied to their police department, like he wanted to do
some kind of research or something, or help them in
crime scenes or something. So maybe he was just casually
asking them about their job.

Speaker 3 (57:35):
No, but that's what you would be doing.

Speaker 2 (57:37):
If you're arrested for murder and you didn't commit it,
then you're just casually making small talk with the police.

Speaker 1 (57:44):
Well, if you were arrested for murder and you're in
the back of the car and you did not do it,
what would you be talking about.

Speaker 3 (57:50):
I wouldn't be saying anything. No, No, I don't that.

Speaker 1 (57:55):
You'd be cracking jokes. You'd be like, I didn't push
her off the cliff. She annoys me, but I didn't
do that.

Speaker 3 (58:02):
She's always taken selfies.

Speaker 1 (58:08):
All right. Back to Brian Coberger. So this is another
piece of evidence that I know that the prosecution wants
to enter. Coburger wrote in twenty twenty while he was
a student at the Sales University of Pennsylvania this is
where he got his undergrad degree and criminology, that they
wanted to introduce this paper he wrote that shows the
defendant's knowledge of crime scenes. First of all, he's a

(58:30):
criminology major. Of course, he wrote papers about crime scene
Oh yeah, the twelve page paper entitled it.

Speaker 2 (58:36):
Was not like he was a theater major and he
wrote it wrote a script about killing four, you know,
college students in Idaho.

Speaker 1 (58:44):
I mean, of course he wrote about crime scenes. He's
getting a PhD in criminology. I mean that's part of
the scope of his education. But the twelve page paper
entitled crime Scene Scenario Final used an example of a
killing at which a knife was a currently used. The
paper discusses the many steps authorities should take to secure

(59:05):
and investigate a crime scene, and details the equipment used
for crime scene investigation, how to collect evidence, and how
to enter a crime scene to avoid contamination, including wearing
gloves and other protective equipment. He clearly missed the part
about leaving behind evidence, though, I feel like he should
have focused more on taking your crime scene weapon home

(59:30):
right afterwards. Anything that is fiber free, because you don't
want to leave fibers and covers the mouth, hair and
overall body would be helpful in avoiding crime scene contamination
basically because you don't want to leave DNA behind, right.
So I guess they want to submit this paper as
evidence that he's aware of how to not contaminate a

(59:51):
crime scene. But also it is interesting and we didn't
talk about this yet because there wasn't. There wasn't And
they did confiscate his car and they did the whole
thorough check up with nothing. They found nothing. There was
no DNA from the from any of the kids, There
was no blood, there was no there's nothing. So I

(01:00:11):
don't know if he did some incredible thorough cleaning of
the car or or he.

Speaker 3 (01:00:17):
Wore like a whole suit or something. It dumped.

Speaker 2 (01:00:20):
It was just completely covered so that there was no
That means there was no transferring like a fibers from
their house to his car.

Speaker 1 (01:00:28):
Right, and he he killed four people with a knife.
There's blood everywhere. How did he not get any blood
transferred from these killings in this house to the car
to the car?

Speaker 3 (01:00:41):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (01:00:41):
You tell me that.

Speaker 3 (01:00:43):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:00:44):
I can only picture he had something like full blown
like you know, you know Beekeeper's outfit on, like and then.

Speaker 3 (01:00:52):
He tossed.

Speaker 1 (01:00:54):
That departed where uh yeah, at the end. Oh it's
Wahlberg right where he walked to that apartment at the
end and he's just covered from bad to do with.

Speaker 2 (01:01:04):
A gun in his hand, right yeah. And then Matt
David's character is like, oh, man, like, I know where
this is going.

Speaker 1 (01:01:10):
But the only thing is she saw him and he
had the mask on. But I don't think she said
she said he was dressed in black. It's also dark.
It's also four.

Speaker 2 (01:01:20):
Twenty morning, So I imagine she just saw his eyes
and then slammed the door or whatever.

Speaker 3 (01:01:24):
I don't imagine she like, you know, looked him up
and down.

Speaker 1 (01:01:27):
I don't know all. I just can't get past the
fact that he stabbed four students and ended up not
tracking blood anywhere and not having blood in his car.

Speaker 3 (01:01:38):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (01:01:39):
Let's talk about what the motive would be. It's unclear
if Brian Coberger had a motive or knew the victims beforehand.
We did talk about how possibly he knew them from
going to this restaurant. However, Kaylee Gone called us. His parents,
Steven Christie, believe they have proof of a connection, and
the minutes after learning Coburger's name, Christy, the mom says,

(01:01:59):
we went online and immediately started googling. They say they
discovered digital evidence that showed a tie between Coburger and
two of the victims. In an interview with forty eight hours,
the Gone Calvis family provided screenshots of an Instagram account
they believe belonged to Coburger. Those screenshots include what they
say is Coburger's Instagram profile and a list of people
he was following, including Matti Mogan and Kaylee Gonekalvez. Forty

(01:02:24):
eight hours has not been able to confirm the authenticity
of this Instagram account. However, Christy Gone Calvez, who is
the mother, says when they attempted to cross reference the
accounts of Kaylee, Mattie, Xana, and Ethan, it appeared that
that this Coburger account had interacted with Mattie's Instagram. You
would go to Mattie's Instagram account and look at her pictures,

(01:02:44):
and he liked them. Christy said, so he was actively
looking at the Instagram account. That's something else that I
think is interesting that'll come more up a trial was
whether this was his Instagram account, if they can link
it to him in some way to authenticate it, and
if so, then he clearly had some kind of obsession.
I would say, yeah, that he found her online. He's

(01:03:06):
met her at the restaurant, she was cute and blonde.
He finds her Instagram, He's liking her photos, he's sending
her a DM. He probably followed her home from work
one day he found out where.

Speaker 2 (01:03:16):
She lived, Not like he went out on three dates
and she dumped him and said I want to see
you and then he got obsessed.

Speaker 3 (01:03:21):
And killed her.

Speaker 2 (01:03:21):
Yeah, it's like he never even like interactive with he
never went on a date with her, and he wants
to kill her.

Speaker 3 (01:03:27):
Like you're obsessed where you just want to follow him
and then kill him. Yeah, weird. I mean it's it's
evil either way, but it's just weird.

Speaker 1 (01:03:35):
Well, I mean he's a serial killer, so I know
he's killer. He's not a serial killer. He killed four people,
not a serial killing.

Speaker 3 (01:03:41):
A serial kill you have to keep repeating the crime
over and over. So you're saying because he killed four people,
well then every burglar would be a serial burglar because
they took more one thing in the house.

Speaker 1 (01:03:50):
Oh yeah, I never thought of it that way.

Speaker 3 (01:03:51):
Yeah, I'll start thinking like idea and you'll get a
lot fast.

Speaker 1 (01:03:54):
Well, you know what, he might have killed again, though,
but he messed up so many times. Sad he was caught,
and maybe he went into criminology because he's obsessed with
crimes and he wanted to commit the perfect crime.

Speaker 3 (01:04:08):
Maybe maybe and so and then he saw her.

Speaker 2 (01:04:12):
I mean, I guess people do go into their career
like to pursue their career to perfect.

Speaker 3 (01:04:16):
Yeah. Like if I'm going to go to culinary art school,
it's because I want to like bake the best pie. Right, yeah,
so maybe he did.

Speaker 1 (01:04:23):
I can't him a picture you baking a pie. I
would pay money to watch you bake a pie.

Speaker 3 (01:04:27):
I can picture you eating a pie.

Speaker 1 (01:04:28):
Okay, thank you for that.

Speaker 3 (01:04:32):
Pie? You know you like him?

Speaker 1 (01:04:33):
I love pie? Yeah, key pie is my favorite. All right.
The parents that we were talking about this is Kaylee's
parents say the account that they found, this Instagram account
of Brian Coburger is no longer active. It disappeared shortly
after his arrest. What did he do? Like, how do
you do you have access after you're arrested, you have
access to get on Instagram and deactivate your account.

Speaker 3 (01:04:55):
He might deactivated it before. I don't know. Like as
he got arrested, well he got a ret you have
one phone call.

Speaker 1 (01:05:02):
It's like he can't call Instagram.

Speaker 3 (01:05:03):
He just logged on his Instagram. Yeah, d x J
whit out.

Speaker 1 (01:05:07):
So let's talk about some of the defense. What's the
defense going to say? First of all, without even going
through this rundown, I'll tell you the defense is going
to use reasonable doubt.

Speaker 3 (01:05:16):
Because the defense us reasonable doubt. I know that. Sorry, no,
but I was.

Speaker 1 (01:05:21):
You didn't let me explain. Of course, they're going to
use reasonable doubt. But I'll tell you they're going to
use reasonable doubt because there was also blood found on
a handrail that they did not test, And there was
a glove with blood found outside of the house a
couple of days after the murder and they did not test.

Speaker 3 (01:05:39):
Why were they not test that?

Speaker 1 (01:05:40):
I don't know. I am dumbfounded by.

Speaker 3 (01:05:42):
Oh, this little button on this knife cover, we're gonna test. Yeah,
but the bloody knife, we don't need to look into that.

Speaker 1 (01:05:49):
Not a bloody knife blood.

Speaker 3 (01:05:51):
Yeah, the stairway or stairwell or whatever.

Speaker 1 (01:05:54):
Yes, I've read that these two other And also there
was DNA found a Maddie's fingernails that come from that
did not match coburger. So there was like her DNA
and unknown DNA and then another unknown DNA something like that.
There's like a three part mixture and that wasn't tested.
I believe that wasn't. Well, no, it was because it

(01:06:14):
was unknown. I don't know, but there's the bloody glove
and then the blood in the hallway. They did not
test and for some reason I did read in some
of these affidatas that they said that it was ineligible
to be tested in codes. And I couldn't figure out
why it was ineligible. I don't know. If the sample
was too small, or there was some contamination.

Speaker 2 (01:06:34):
I don't know, but I wonder if they didn't want
to test it maybe, or maybe they tested it and
didn't come up as the same, so they just.

Speaker 1 (01:06:41):
So you're saying they just said it wasn't tested.

Speaker 3 (01:06:43):
I don't know. I don't know.

Speaker 1 (01:06:46):
I thought maybe, and I don't know.

Speaker 3 (01:06:49):
This is just me.

Speaker 1 (01:06:50):
This is me speculating that maybe they didn't want to
test it, because then if it comes up to someone else,
then they have to investigate that person. It takes away
from Coburger, then it's too convoluted and they have.

Speaker 2 (01:07:04):
The defense will probably come up with the you you
didn't look into anything else, You had thousands of blinders,
only looked at my guy because you had one little
thing on him, and then that then you directed all
the evidence towards him, and.

Speaker 1 (01:07:18):
We know that happens. We know that happens in a
lot of cases where you find a suspect and then
they the police does a hardcore go after that suspect
to the exclusion of anyone else that could possibly be involved.

Speaker 2 (01:07:30):
Defense is going to be like, once you don't look
at the DNA evidence on the knife cover, and once
you overlook the my client gazing at the stars twelve times,
and once you overlook the DMS, and once you overlook
the fact that he bought a knife eight months prior
and kept searching after the crime, and he bought this
scheme mass at Dicks.

Speaker 3 (01:07:50):
Once you overlook that, you will see that my client
is innocent. And I urge you to look at the
facts that make my clients all right.

Speaker 1 (01:07:58):
In other news, in this case, which I was interesting,
they actually did demolish the house. And I told you
this the other day and you said that that's pretty normal, when.

Speaker 3 (01:08:06):
Well, I don't know it's normal. I think that's probably
not far fetched.

Speaker 2 (01:08:09):
Yeah, when there's like a mass murder, I mean, hang
going to rent that out to their college dents.

Speaker 1 (01:08:14):
Well, I think there's sickos that would like to.

Speaker 3 (01:08:17):
Rent it there would be, and then you'd have to
disclose it right when you sell it.

Speaker 1 (01:08:21):
Well, I think also maybe they had to demolish it
because all these crime scene junkies there. People probably be
driving by it all the time, like you, I would love. Yeah,
now I went to the Meninda's house, I would drive
by out take a road trip.

Speaker 3 (01:08:32):
That's probably another way. So it's really just a clean slate.

Speaker 1 (01:08:36):
Yeah. The off campus house was demolished on December twenty eight,
twenty twenty three, despite mixed feelings from the victims' families.
University officials said they decided to tear down the house
during winter break to try to decrease further impact on
the students.

Speaker 3 (01:08:49):
Who live in that area the school owned it.

Speaker 1 (01:08:52):
Kaylee Gone Calves's family was firmly against knocking down the house,
saying doing so would destroy one of the most crucial
pieces of evidence in the case. For a trial date
was even set.

Speaker 3 (01:09:01):
Oh well, I was just assuming they collected all the
evidence and they got the green light.

Speaker 1 (01:09:06):
Well they did, because I did read that both sides,
prosecution and defense, both agreed that they could tear the
house down because they felt as if they had everything
they needed. I do understand the families thinking that I
don't know, maybe there's something more than someone. Well, I guessed,
and now they can never recover it.

Speaker 2 (01:09:20):
It's better to I guess if I was the parent
the victim, I'd be like, we, I'd rather preserve it
just in case, you never know, right, I guess.

Speaker 1 (01:09:28):
Now they don't have that option exactly. So the two
surviving roommates is Bethany Funk and Dylan Mortenson, have largely
remained silent since the killings. That's because there was a
gag order on this case. They're not allowed to well.

Speaker 3 (01:09:40):
Yeah, what are they gonna do? Go on podcasts in time?

Speaker 1 (01:09:42):
No, they well, they clearly can't talk about it. They
also had to move this case. They moved the venue,
they moved it out of whatever this area is. It's
going to be in Boise, which is I'm not sure
exactly how far away. But I read that it doesn't
really even make that much of a difference, because I
think they did a poll as to how many people
have heard about the case and knew about it.

Speaker 3 (01:09:59):
Everyone know about especially in Idaho.

Speaker 1 (01:10:01):
It wasn't I'm moving in to Boise didn't make that
big of a difference. So jury selection is going to
be challenging as well, because I don't know how you're
going to find a jury that hasn't already had some
kind of preconceived notion that Brian, especially with.

Speaker 2 (01:10:18):
Us doing this podcast, everyone in Idaho listens to us,
they do, and now they're gonna they're.

Speaker 1 (01:10:23):
Going to know what we know and what we think
we know.

Speaker 3 (01:10:27):
Right, we've clearly cracked the case.

Speaker 1 (01:10:29):
We've cracked the case. We don't care about the other
DNA out there was Dan. Yes, it's he's a vegan.
He has bushy eyebrows. His name is Burger, Yes, and
he drives around at night twelve stars at the stars
on a dead end stream.

Speaker 2 (01:10:46):
I'm a criminal. I'm a criminology major with a uh
A minor in astrology.

Speaker 3 (01:10:52):
Exactly, I guess. So.

Speaker 1 (01:10:54):
The two girls wrote letters to their lost friends, which
were read aloud by a passer During a December twenty
second service for Kernodle. The two girls got matching tattoos
to memorialize their four friends, with initials of the victims'
names on their arms along with angel wings. Many people
blame Mortensen for waiting to call nine one one until
the next day, since she saw coburger in the house.

(01:11:15):
I mean, I don't know if it would have made
any difference. I don't think any of them like we're
alive for long, do you know what I mean? Like
if she called nine to one one when she saw
someone in the house, would that have made a difference
what they have and they have survived.

Speaker 3 (01:11:30):
I think probably, possibly not.

Speaker 2 (01:11:32):
But I think it goes back to earlier in our conversation,
which is that's probably normal response to call the police
right away, Yeah, instead of checking your LinkedIn account.

Speaker 1 (01:11:42):
I mean, it is a normal response. But then again,
I've never been in that situation, so I'm trying not
to judge, but I just I can't get past not
being able to get a hold of your roommates, hearing
weird noises and seeing a masked man in your house,
and you don't call nine to one one until the
next day when a friend comes over. And I think
the friend came over and actually went to check on
the roommates and found them dead, and that's why they

(01:12:04):
finally called nine to one one. I'm confused. That's why
I'm looking forward to the trial, because I feel like
a lot of good, a better gape, there'll be a
better timeline and better details, and they're clearly going to testify,
and they're going to talk about what they talked about
with their parents and what they were doing on social
media and what their mind was during that time period.
So to me, that's really interesting. Many some even suspect

(01:12:25):
that Mortenson and Funk, that's Bethany and Dylan were involved
in the murder. That's a lot of people online, you know,
those online slus like to to learn all this stuff
and then speculate that maybe the roommates were involved and
that's why they didn't call nine one one. I personally,
from reading everything that I've read and going through everything,
I don't think that's the case. I think they just
made bad decisions, and I think maybe they were overly intoxicated,

(01:12:49):
and maybe that I don't thinkge maybe she questioned what
she saw and thought I'll sound stupid if I'm.

Speaker 2 (01:12:56):
Wrong or something. I don't think it sounds I don't
think it changed. Just really any of the necessary facts
to determine whether he was guilty or not.

Speaker 1 (01:13:04):
Right, Well, do you have any other questions, because we
have come to the end of the Brian Coburger case
and the Idaho murders. Again, I'm very interested in the
trial and hopefully we'll follow along.

Speaker 3 (01:13:15):
Well, I have a question. Is he in custody? Yes? Okay,
no bail?

Speaker 1 (01:13:20):
No, I don't think so. So anyway, the trial will
be interesting, a lot more details will come out, obviously,
the roommates will testify, the family members I know family
members are expected to testify as well, even Brian's family members.

Speaker 2 (01:13:34):
Well, yeah, because to explain the Amazon account, right, because
did you purchase a knife?

Speaker 3 (01:13:38):
Okay, did you purchase a knife?

Speaker 1 (01:13:40):
Okay?

Speaker 3 (01:13:40):
Again, it leaves him. It's the only one that purchases right.

Speaker 1 (01:13:42):
All right. Thanks for listening to legally Brunette. We appreciate it.
And if you haven't listened to all our episodes, you
can go back and listen to them. And thanks again.
We appreciate it.

Speaker 3 (01:13:51):
Thank you,