Bryan Kohberger Hearing - The Defense Asked WHAT?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 апр 2024
- Watch the full stream: ruclips.net/user/livebr1oL38F5Bg
Bryan Kohberger had a hearing on April 4, 2024 to discuss the fact that his attorneys were surveying potential jurors over the phone without the courts knowledge. The prosecution believes that the questions asked violated the non dissemination order and the defense accused the prosecution of violating due process. The judge sided with the prosecution stating they didn't violated due process and put a temporary hold on the survey until further notice. A hearing is scheduled on Wed, April 10, 2024 to come up with better questions for a new survey. I will cover that live on @TheEmilyDBaker channel.
STAY IN THE LOOP WITH EMILY D. BAKER
Download Our FREE App: lawnerdapp.com
Get the Free Email Alert: www.LawNerdAlert.com
Join the community for exclusive content: www.LawNerdsUnite.com
Case Requests & Business Inquiries: emilydbaker@cesddigital.com
Help with the shop: help@emilydbaker.com
Mailing Address: Emily D. Baker 2000 Mallory Ln. St. 130-185, Franklin Tn 37067
LAW NERD MERCH!
www.LawNerdShop.com
LONG FORM CONTENT / @theemilydbaker
The Emily Show Podcast on RUclips: emilydbaker.com/TheEmilyShowP...
Apple Podcasts: emilydbaker.com/AppleTheEmily...
Spotify Podcasts: emilydbaker.com/SpofityTheEmi...
On your favorite podcast player Wednesdays
QUICK CONTENT?
Quick Bits Podcast: emilydbaker.com/quickbitsplay...
Apple Podcasts: emilydbaker.com/AppleQuickBits
Spotify Podcasts: emilydbaker.com/SpotifyQuickBits
Quick Bits Channel: / @emilydbakerquickbits
EMILY ON SOCIAL @TheEmilyDBaker
Instagram: / theemilydbaker
Twitter: / theemilydbaker
Facebook: / theemilydbaker
MY RUclips TOOLS
**My Favorite RUclips TOOL VidIQ vidiq.com/LawNerd
WHAT I USE TO STREAM: www.emilydbaker.com/streamyard
Follow My Cats on Instagram:
/ fredandgeorge_cat
Emily’s glasses lenses are Irlen tint www.irlen.com
This video is not legal advice; it is commentary for educational and entertainment purposes. Some links shared are affiliate links, all sponsorships are stated in video. Videos are based on publicly available information unless otherwise stated. Sharing a resource is not an endorsement; it is a resource. Copyright 2020-2023 Baker Media, LLC 
Развлечения
As a statistician, the fact that it’s assumed, by the defense, that they will need a change of venue automatically biases their results.
If they hadn’t heard it before, they’ve heard it now.
Even as a 20-year-old college kid, I would have known as a pre-law major getting ready to take my LSTA I would haven't let a survey go out without myself or one of my para-legal reviewing something that I would have my name attached to. Anne Taylor is either lying that she or someone in or firm never saw the questions or she is so arrogant that she believes she can do what ever she please and get away with it.
She was very careful to say that she didn't WRITE the questions.
@gkd1982 Seems like buck-passing. If her name is on it though and she wants to use it as reason to force a venue change then she should be on the hook for it. If someone on my team makes a blunder that big, I'm gonna get hauled out by my boss because in turn that makes them look bad in front of their bosses and possibly fouls up future dealings.
@@blu_maboo Plausible deniability considering how angry JJJ was.
@@gkd1982 I am glad I'm not a law worker of any kind. I would lose my sh!t at so many people so often 😅
so sick that a hardworking innocent young man's life gets ruined by false accusations. He needs $ million payout after he gets out next year.
Move Out of the Lynch Mob town!
The song lyrics just cracked me up all over again! 😂😂😂❤ Judge Judge was NOT gonna stand for the accusation he violated due process 😂😂
When I heard the prosecution read some of the survey questions, I had to shake my head. Anyone with a PhD (such as the person who wrote these questions) should know from research methods that these very specific questions do not follow protocols for survey research design. They sound more like a sneaky backdoor way to disseminate information. I wouldn't doubt that this was Kohberger's idea and his attorney seconded it in order to force a change of venue. They rolled the dice to get what they were already denied, imo. The prosecution is spot on.
The personal irony of all of this for me is I just graduated in Dec. from a forensic psych program. My research focus in the program was pre-trial publicity. In my research methods class, my assignment to design a mock survey pertained to this case (not really utilized - only turned in for a grade). I actually had to make sure I crafted questions according to protocol, or I would get a bad grade. LOL. Someone should grade this survey. You get an F, sir.
I'm waiting for someone with a sirname of Dread, to become a judge. 😂
AT, i don’t believe that you didn’t know the questions…
I don’t think that the yes/no nature of the questions proves that there is bias. People could have heard about all of those things (who hasn’t??) but yet still feel they could be impartial on a jury. It’s pretty sketchy that Ann Taylor didn’t review the questions before the survey was conducted. And, even if the 400 people were excluded from being called for jury, how many people did *they* then tell about the questions they’d been asked? It’s like AT is trying to force the change of venue…isn’t there some kind of penalty for her if so?
Yes Jury tampering charges.
OK I had NO IDEA that "Quick Bits" was an entirely separate channel!! How did I miss this?!?!?
Me either! Though it would appear I’m already subscribed haha
I can’t help but believe they intentionally poisoned the jury pool.
Now I'm gonna have Vanilla Ice stuck in my head all day.
Took me three lyrics in before I was like “wait a minute…”
These questions are CRINGE. They basically asked if people knew the prosecution's key points of their case. They're pointed and closed questions. I'm sorry, the defense "expert" knew or ought to have known this is not the standard process for such survey questioning. I do agree with some who theorize that this was an intentional "accidentally on purpose" tactic to strengthen a motion for change of venue. Not checking the questions before they were asked is pure negligence IMO and just doesn't make sense.
The defense in this case has done some unbelievably outlandish things! I know the angle of the defense is to prove innocence but it feels like they're deliberately making this case more sensational.
@@tiredofitall9213not really prove innocence but show there is reasonable doubt about the prosecution case
unbeliavable with this survey ….the fuckery and audacity is off the charts imo 🥒🥝🌳🥝🥝
love that sweater on you Emily 💛🤩🤩🤩
The "Oh Boy" comments during the questions was 😂
I believe AT was at fault because she didn’t give her surveyor the non dissemination order and she knew it. To me she was very disrespectful to Judge Judge.
I think Taylor is very competent, but her conduct toward the Judge, would not have been tolerated by any of the judges I appeared before.
Huhhh?
Unbelievable! I can't believe the defense has done this!😳
Isn't this tainting the jury pool? I my opinion it's sneaky stuff!
@@koolblue6927the two sides arguing about shit that doesn’t matter, meanwhile 4 people are dead and deserve justice…
so sick that a hardworking innocent young man's life gets ruined by false accusations. He needs $ million payout after he gets out next year.
Move Out of the Lynch Mob town!
Potentially jury tampering
@@ElaraNightsky I smell a rat. What do you know that clears him of the fact that he stalked one of them and killed atleast one of them.
Those questions are still awful hearing them for a second time 😅
On second listen, and after watching ian and rob discuss, I think it's just fine. Everything the defense expert asked was already out in the media. And more importantly, almost all of it had came from press conferences conducted by the police and the prosecutors before the gag order.
The state wants to have it both ways. They want to be able to tamper the jury pool after the arrest by having all of these pressers and then immediately agreed to a gag order before the defense can do anything.
@@atticusmatlock4305 even so you don't last out at the judge for daring to use his legal powers nor do you conduct jury questioning in a survey.
@Denozo88 Yes you do conduct jury surveys. This is normal. Judge Judge likes Judge Judge.
@@atticusmatlock4305 Their is a difference between a survey and a questionnaire that reeks of forcing a change of venue.
As someone who hasn't followed the case at all, I felt the questions gave me lots of information on it.
And if I were to be on the jury I would now be expecting to see stalking, knife and DNA evidence. If it wasn't presented I would assume it was one of those dodgy defence tactics to exclude the jury from all the evidence.
So yes, hearing the questionnaire moved me towards guilty hence it was definitely contaminating.
If I were on trial in such a high-profile case as this, I would prefer jurors who had “all the knowledge,” but swear they could keep an open mind than jurors who had no knowledge of the case. What scenario would exist for someone NOT to have any knowledge, especially in the same county?
I watch a lot of true crime and I still maintain that I could be open minded and decide based only on evidence I’m presented during trial. I’ve had my first initially thoughts changed by watching cases too.
Also the jury members don’t have to have NEVER heard of BK, they just have to be able to be unbiased and hand down a verdict ONLY on what is heard during trial 🙄
I don’t like the way AT is trying to play her defense strategy at all.. it seems is sneaky
@@jessice293the case should be decided by the facts and the evidence. They need people who have an open enough mind to decide on those factors.
For them to be one of the 99% of the population that does not care about the case. Especially outside the county.
💜 Thank you, Emily. I knew a little bit of this these events, did not totally understand, however YOUR explaination made it all make sense for me. Yikers! What a big mess that will take up more valuable time, efforts, and expense to be mopped up. 😒
I feel such deep, deep sadness for the families. 😢
Yikes these questions. When I was questioned to be a juror on a civil case involving 2 overseas companies doing business in the US (Bank & Software/website staterup), we got the most vague questions. Like have you ever worked on a website or a bank. 😅 These are TOO specific to the case, which seems weird even IF they had no idea about the details about this murder trial.
I'm in Nevada & yes, to All of the above
Questions designed to justify a change of venue?
I just can’t with the Judge Judge
Jury tamper
Impossible with info what was already out there
Oh ya. Thank you for the update. 😊
I think Ann overstepped this time. She ruffled some feathers
You have to be living uder a rock to not have heard those things.
If defense had read the Memorandum of Points and Authorities Relating to Nondissemination Order, filed 2/8/23; specifically point 1, about Sheppard v Maxwell, to understand why the Court may have acted the way it did. Defense was out of bounds, disseminating facts about the case. We’re prolly lucky the hearing was even open to public.
Disseminating facts that anyone could just read in the PCA that is made public. It's not like it's secret.
@@tonystevenson26Even if it's already out in the public, what if someone hadn't heard it and now they've had that info/story/rumour forced on them? That person is now tainted. Defence can't say they want people without that knowledge when they are in fact recirculating that knowledge, surely.
They were only items in the public. That is allowed by the the non-dissemination order in this case.
Wherever it ended up, it wouldn’t be in the media domain; for they are not bound to this gag order.
Hello, from the Netherlands 💜👋🇳🇱
Isn’t the horse out of the barn regarding the survey questions?
i cant believe you got song lyrics to fit perfectly into 11 minutes...🥰 i will say I am carefully screening sarah boone out of my content because I live here. If a survey showed up telling me this and I got booted from jury because of it I would be ticked. Even if its out there in the media, I'm not watching it
Oooooo, it's a Sunday special!!!!
I hate this case. I enjoy your coverage but as a mother it just makes me so sad. You send your children off for a brighter future and it is taken from them.
Ouchy questions!!!!
Wow, talk about tainting the potential jury pool... those questions are ridiculous! I don't know what the defence thinks they're doing, but they seem to be forgetting this is a highly publicised case.... by the time they're finished disseminatiing critical evidence & false narratives to the local population they may find that neighbouring counties are even less sympathetic to the defence.
I'd love to know who they surveyed though, because I suspect that a company who think those questions are appropriate is unlikely to be able to recognise bias or downstream impacts from their own methodology or sampling.
Was this today Sunday the 7th? Or last week?
I was wondering why I got an alert for this video on Sunday, April 7th. Did I get the alert late?
This was a highlight from a hearing on Thursday the 4th.
Heard all but one
Dirtying the Jury pool!
⚖️
By summer 2025 no matter what county they go to will have heard even more about this case
The reality is 99% of the population of any country other than Latah simply don't care.
Hi 👋
Pardon my ignorance of your legal system (I'm a Brit), but even if all these rumours/stories/facts had already been released in the press, surely re-airing it all would taint anyone who had somehow missed hearing it, so no matter what excuse the defence gives for these questions then they're still tainting the pool. This all seems very deliberate to move the venue by force. Defence is way too sly and seems to think everyone else is an idiot...
Agreed! I really don’t like the conduct of the defense at all, it really rubs me the wrong way
The problem is is that the prosecution I already put all of that information out worldwide
Actually the problem is what the questions were that were in this survey.
The prosecution didn’t. Some of what was put out was based on rumors made up on the internet that the media ran with. It’s highly probable that not everyone had heard all of that information if they aren’t active on social media or even if they actively consume news through any source. It could very much taint the jury pool with misinformation or evidence that could disqualify them from being able to serve on a jury.
@@anthonypecorara4346 Bill Thompson asserted that Voir-Dire would mitigate the issue of the 400 survery participants. They would all be eliminated from serving as Jury members. 400 out of almost 41,000 people. Get over yourself with jury tampering.
"Based on rumors" is exactly why you would perform this type of survey. If it's "highly probable that not everyone had heard all of that information" the survey responses would have indicated such. This would actually confirm no bias. A conclusion based on real world evidence. But for those shocked by this survey, it's mainly because it indicates community bias.
Bildo Thompson, seeking to preserve the jury pool, then read out those questions on a live stream for the world to see. What a knob.
Talk about tainting the honey pot
Hiya!
Stop. Collaborate. And Listen.😅 not everyone will get that but I'm old enough. 😂
💜💜💜
Yes these questions are very pointed to very specific factual information about this case. But it was noted that none of the information used in these questions came from giving the expert who wrote up the survey any additional information outside of what he could read for himself in media. This was pointed out here in court. The dissemination order specifically allows for this survey to use any information already put out there in the media, which is the whole point of the survey to start with. It is to see if the potential jury pool has heard enough of this information about this case released by the media to create a bias that would mean this person cannot hope for a fair trail in this area. This allowance is specifically stipulated in the dissemination order. It seems to me that the defense did exactly as it was meant to do. Also, a judge needs to be hearing from both sides of an issue in order to make a decision, not doing so is to run foul of due process. I would prefer he have every advantage to which he is entitled to ensure if he is convicted that no 'technicalities' will then get him off.
The DEFENSE has polluted the jury pool.
They should not get to benefit from this.
STOP! Collaborate and Listen🎶
Defense attorneys have a duty to do everything to get their clients off but sometimes they should know better. Be seen to present a sound defense but in conscience let your client be imprisoned forever. I'd be a sh!t defense attorney.
He too scary looking. Haven't been able to follow this one. Rip to the students. Not watching vid but wanted to pop in and give my hugs to the family that are hurting.😢❤
It's interesting seeing EDB's take on this and then watching Runkle & Rob's takes on it.
Personally, I'm inclined to give a split ballot on who was in the right and wrong:
1) The major issue regarding tainting the jury pool is the prosecution's fault. The questions are somewhat problematic, but are both within the letter of the order (which is the only grounds anyone should have to impose _prior restraints_ on the defense's activities here) and about as benign as can be accomplished while still getting the information the defense has an obligation to collect as part of their job (a point which could be IMHO relevant _after the fact_ during the change of venue hearing). The survey might have amplified problematic information that was already out there, but not nearly as much as the filings and hearing did. The prosecution Streisand'ed themselves.
2) The prosecution's concerns *were* reasonable, even if they are ultimately unfounded and the court was in the right to say "pause the work until we sort this out" (but should have made it clear from the start that the pause was _temporary_ and "deadlines will be adjusted as necessary to avoid creating issues").
The Defense did nothing wrong. The guy running the poll was only talking about things that were in the public. That does not violate the non-dissemination order. The prosecutor is going beyond what he should and the judge is forgetting his order.
so sick that a hardworking innocent young man's life gets ruined by false accusations. He needs $ million payout after he gets out next year.
Move Out of the Lynch Mob town!
I swear your a bot who is rigged to forget the stalking and the killing of atleast one of the ladies. His knife was found in the bed of one of the dead ladies.
@@Denozo88 stalking was confirmed 100% fake for an year now
@WalpNacht you do realize his dna was found in the bed of one of the dead girls. Key part is none of the girls knew who he was so why is his DNA their then?
@@ElaraNightsky stop spamming that he is innocent as he is not.
@@Denozo88 all evidence confirms he is innocent
Really? Are you impartial? Time to watch Andrea Burkhart!
Impartial is somewhere in the middle.
This chick has no clue what she’s taking about
She has more of an idea than you ever will