Attorneys for Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of killing four University of Idaho students in 2022, argued that the state’s pursuit of the death penalty violates the U.S. Constitution.
In 13 new filings Thursday, the defense cited the U.S. and Idaho Constitutions in its request to remove the death penalty as a possible sentence if a jury finds Kohberger guilty of murder.
“The process provided to Mr. Kohberger up to this point has failed to adequately protect him from being arbitrarily selected for the death penalty,” one filing read.
Kohberger faces four counts of first-degree murder and burglary after prosecutors allege he broke into an off-campus home near the University of Idaho and fatally stabbed four students. Last year, the state indicated its intent to pursue the death penalty at Kohberger’s trial, which is tentatively set for next June.
To sentence him to death, jurors must find that there were aggravating factors or circumstances that made the crime more severe. In this case, prosecutors asserted five such factors: that there were multiple murders, that the murders were committed amid another crime (felony murder), that Kohberger exhibited “utter disregard for human life,” that he “has exhibited a propensity to commit murder” and so poses a future danger to society, and that the murders were “especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel.”
The defense, led by Idaho’s interim chief public defender Jay Logsdon, challenged these aggravating factors with the following arguments:
- Multiple murders: The defense argued that having multiple victims “tells us nothing about the culpability of the offender” or whether the death penalty is justified.
- Felony murder: The additional crime of burglary was done solely to commit the murder, the defense argued, thus making it an inherent part of the crime and not an additional aggravator.
- Utter disregard, future dangerousness and the murder being “heinous, atrocious, or cruel”: The defense argued that these claims were “unconstitutionally vague” and lacked clear standards for applying the death penalty.
In six more motions, defense attorneys sought to eliminate the death penalty with the following arguments:
- A lack of a “neutral fact finder,” such as a grand jury, gives prosecutors “unhampered discretion” in pursuing the death penalty.
- The methods Idaho uses for execution — lethal injection or a firing squad — are inhumane and violate Kohberger’s constitutional rights protecting against cruel and unusual punishment. Idaho Gov. Brad Little signed the firing squad method into law last year.
- Idaho’s death penalty system is unconstitutional because it lacks clear criteria, leading to arbitrary decisions and violating rights to fair treatment.
- The death penalty is outdated and no longer aligns with modern standards of decency, and it goes against international treaties that the U.S. is bound to follow.
- Idaho’s requirement for a speedy trial makes it difficult for Kohberger’s lawyers to prepare for a death penalty case adequately.
The defense also asked that the prosecution disclose in advance any additional reasons or non-legal aggravating factors they plan to use to argue for the death penalty. The prosecution should be required to prove those factors beyond a reasonable doubt, Kohberger’s lawyers argued.
Finally, the defense requested that the trial be divided into three phases instead of the usual two: guilt and penalty. They proposed adding an “eligibility phase” in between to determine if Kohberger was eligible for the death penalty before deciding whether to impose it, arguing that combining these decisions could confuse the jury.
The state has until October 10 to respond to the defense’s arguments. The next hearing is scheduled for November 7.
A possible motive in the killings remains unclear. The state says it has linked Kohberger to the murders through DNA evidence, cellphone signals and security videos, while the defense has submitted an alibi.
Another issue in this case is whether Kohberger’s trial should be moved to a different county to ensure a fair trial. A judge heard arguments last Thursday after the defense claimed that a severe “mob mentality” against him within the community justified moving the trial out of Latah County, where the killings took place, and to Ada County, home to Idaho’s capital, Boise.
The judge indicated that this decision would be one of the most crucial he would make.
Following the hearing, the family of Kaylee Goncalves, one of the victims, released a statement condemning the ongoing delays in the case.
“The victims’ families want justice, but just as importantly, we want the case to move forward,” the family said. “Every hearing is painful to watch with an endless lack of organization and accountability.”
Shanshan Dong and Irene Byon contributed.
