Lawyer Reacts: Kohberger Accuses The State Of Hiding Things - Says The Public Must Hear The Truth! 

Hey, the state's been trying cases in the public for years and now they want to act indignant that the defense is doing the same? I have little to no sympathy for people who want convictions over truth.

Two questions came to my mind: 1) How would the state have been able to charge Kohberger with the evidence they listed in the probable cause affidavit if they didn’t actually have that evidence? 2) Suppose Kohberger hadn’t waived the right to speedy trial. If the prosecutor is claiming they don’t have key evidence from the FBI almost 2 years into the case, how would they have gotten and used that evidence within the speedy trial time frame?

The defense is requesting things that the state SHOULD have in their possession. How did they arrest him when things noted in the affidavit are not even available? Something is fishy here

Anne Taylor is a beast. Now that’s a defense attorney we need more of. No matter whether or not you believe BK is guilty.

I’m not convinced of anything until I hear all the facts.

When the Judge defended the prosecution saying “ they have provided SOME of the discovery” it sounded ridiculous.

💯 the defence should have had all this months ago! How was the state ready for trial months ago without the actual information!! Pieces of video? Missing audio? Sorry, she’s absolutely right here. She should have everything! I do feel the state does not have a slam dunk!

Why is this still an ongoing issue? 🤷🏼‍♀️ The State should turn over the evidence requested by the defense so that this case finally go to trial. Both BK and the victims are being done a disservice at this point.

I'm having a hard time with this discovery timeline. Seems to me that Kohberger had no choice *but* to waive speedy trial, since discovery was not even close to completion at the end of the speedy trial period. Defendants are not supposed to have to choose between a speedy trial and a fair trial, but it seems they often are, and this is a good example. Seems unconstitutional to me.

Ann is a consummate professional! I’ve thought so from the get go, but she nailed it in this hearing. She is bold , but well tempered….bravo!

I am confused how you can arrest someone, let alone keep them in jail for over a year, if you don’t have access to a big portion of the evidence that put him there in the first place? Make it make sense. If the FBI was involved with the investigation, shouldn’t they have handed over their portion of the evidence then and there?

It never seemed like a slamdunk. Roommates took hours to call police. No blood in car or on Brian, one tiny smige of dna on button of knife guard. I have soooo many questions. What about the door dash when everyone was being attacked? If he did it. They need to prove it.

Good to see that she said “this car” instead of saying “Bryan’s car” like she did before

If this was used to arrest the defendant. Then surely it should be available for the defence. Not just for the defendant also the victims

I love that Anne is calling the state out on their shady tactics. She's just evening the playing field, and it needed to be done.

The minute they destroyed the house before trial caused reasonable doubt. I would have to acquit regardless of any other evidence because it points to framing the defendant so all other evidence is now suspicious.

Simple. If the State relied on it for search warrants, the grand jury, and or the charges then the State HAS it and can provide it to the Defense. Period.

The victims' families are releasing statements expressing how distressing these delays are, and I understand that. But when the state is saying that evidence they used to write the probable cause affidavit isn't at their disposal... You have to ask, then why are they allowed to use it? How can they have had evidence they used for that public document, and now they don't? Ann Taylor has historically been very understanding and openly said she doesn't believe the state is hiding things, so to me this looked like she was finally done with their game playing and called it out.

If the state doesn't have these things in their possession, how can they build a case against BK? That doesn't make sense to me.

AT should ask for the case to be dismissed if the prosecution can't turn over the evidence they used to arrest Bryan.

Well, she wouldn't be saying these things for the public to hear if they would hand over things or at least say what's going on. She wouldn't have an opportunity to say these things if they cooperated.

Why is the state so embarrassed to have an open hearing? I thought you got the right guy! This is the first time I ever heard the state complaining "facts are prejudice against the state"🙄

Thank you for being fair and open minded… you are a great lawyer…. I think Bryan is innocent

noo matter which side you are, you have to ask why the state cannot produce any evidence after 1.5 yrs? and why do the prosecutor beg for close hearings while the BK wants everything public?🤔

if they do not have it then how did they make a arrest ?Is the problem that the feds arrested him, not Idaho ?

I love that words matter!! So, if true that the FBI is not turning over these items, WHY? Are they not the reasons he was arrested? I guess I’m lost. Weren’t these items shown to the Grand Jury?? He’s going to do whatever the state wants!!!!!

If I was on trial for a crime, I would want her representing me.

i'm confused about what the prosecution will be bringing to trial, since they don't seem to have any of the evidence needed to convict bryan in their possession....... if anyone is acting shady, it is absolutely the prosecution. just give the defense the information they're requesting, or drop the charges for lack of evidence.

AT is now playing the game the state has played since the start...remember BT with his press conference? Leaking info? And during the hearings when he let stuff slip, like the questionnaire? She is just doing what the state is doing now.

If the state made the PCA public knowing they didnt have the evidence in hand then anne has a right to let the public know that

I grew up in a small town that relied upon a university for their sole income. Everyone including the university president, the coroner, the prosecutor, law enforcement, etc. work together to keep the perfect facade of the perfect town or else they lose money. All the awhile the sororities and fraternities are running drugs through the college and earning extra money. It’s all going good until their senior year and they want to leave

I really feel sorry for the families of the victims. 💜💙💚💛💚💙💜💙💚💛

Problem is the state or federal send out their accusations and ruin the kife of the oerson accused. It takes 2 years to fight a case in trial meanwhile the state or federal prosecution ruin the persons reputation careers and take all their money to defend themselves. Then if found innocent the state or feds are not head liable for the destruction of ines life.

I now get the impression that the state might be hiding the ball. Like the state hits you with a bat and later says "it wasn't me," the bat (FB1) did it; and you can't ask the bat any questions and the bat is the one taking its time to provide brady material.

I’m so glad to see that so many are now questioning the state. I want justice for the victims, but not at the expense of innocent life getting the death penalty for a crime he did not commit. This entire case is plagued with so much reasonable doubt. The state is clearly hiding something and if they can not hand over the discovery that lead to BK’s arrest then he needs to be released. The circumstantial evidence in this case is not strong enough to stand.

If I was being charge with serial murders I would want to see the evidence. Isn’t that my right?

I can appreciate her position in the fact that she's having to try to prove innocence to a man the entire country has already convicted. She has a tougher battle to fight and she's doing the best she can. Maybe that's playing devil's advocate but I'm just trying to look at it objectively from both sides.

Love how Bill says he's waiting on the feds without explicitly saying he's waiting on the feds. He doesn't want to lie on record. How do they not have such a huge part of their case. Where did it go?? They had to have it to include it in the PCA.

I don’t understand how the State is allowed to accuse any person of a crime with certain information, then say that information does not exist but I’m still going to use it against you in court. The States argument is not very coherent to me.

Every time I watch one of your videos I get to see first hand how defendants are almost never given a fair shake. The state is constantly malicious in prosecution

The state isn't actually hiding anything...except the fact that they have no case and refuse to admit BK isn't their guy.

The prosecution should have enough evidence to convict without reasonable doubt. If the state has this evidence they should be completely transparent and respect the rights of the defendant & victims. This reeks of corruption!!!

I never thought I would say this but this judge needs to go!!!

Hopefully you will explain this: could the state have been able to charge BK ? How could the state had used the evidence that is still not in their possession? Was the arrest even legal?

Peter - great discussion. I dare say today’s episode was remarkably even-handed and well explained by you. 2 thumbs up 👍 you nailed this one. Can’t wait for your next.

The victims deserve better than the circus that is currently taking place.

Americans have already condemned this guy though. Denying this guy due process as if they will never be in a situation like this. They'll stop doing that and question the case when it becomes trend lol.

glad to see finally the doubt is coming to light that i saw all along. go anne!!!!!

Is there evidence that the FBI was actually able to open Kohberger's phone? Was there a warrant for Kohberger's network provider, AT&T, and what did that warrant produce? Does the FBI know they are expected to produce a CAST report? Is there a requisition for that kind of work that anyone can produce? The right to a speedy trial has no meaning at all if the prosecution can't produce the evidence for the claims in the PCA within six months of arrest, let alone 16 months.

that probable cause exists when “whether at [the moment of arrest] the facts and circumstances within [the] knowledge [of the police], and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information, [are] sufficient to warrant a prudent [person] in believing that [a suspect] had committed or was committing an offense.” so my question is after two years. Where is the evidence???

I definitely have doubts at this point

Ok if the state has no access to things than it shouldnt be allowed to be used

If the state had the evidence that they claim they do then why didnt they bring it forth to the defense in the beginning which more than likely would have this trail on the way, Recall several months ago at a hearing stated ... WE ARE READY, YOUR HONOR, Now they need more time ? What ?

With all due respect, Judge Judge, the prosecution responding to SOME of the motions to compel, is not good enough. How did they ever have enough "evidence" at the time of arrest to arrest BK? The fact that Judge Judge also admitted to the fact that there are "many issues in this case," hit hard for me.

Judge Judge wants AT to stop making a record of all the shady stuff BT is doing, then later she won't be able to accuse BT of prosecutorial misconduct - which I believe is entirely possible. Prosecution seems more concerned with a conviction than getting the truth.

State is hiding that they do not have the evidence to support DP case against the Defendant.

I'm not buying what the prosection is selling. Period.

AT has gotten more direct since BT attacked her expert and in court said she cannot be trusted. I live in Idaho and BT is an ASS

My issue is that had there been a speedy trial... The state doesn't have the evidence. This is not right and shady.

Why aren’t the FEDS giving information that would assist with completing the case, either for or against BK? Is there a ‘twist’ in the case that the FBI doesn’t want out there? If the FBI doesn’t have direct involvement they should want to handoff the info ASAP.

He has a right to know the full case against him. It may be that a defendant sees the evidence and decides to plead guilty but theyre not going to if they dont know the case against them and especially if innocent!

Ms. Taylor is right!! Let's not forget the state bragged a lot they were ready to go to trail prior to BK giving up his right to a speedy trial. So, why is the state hiding these things now? It is obvious they weren't ready for this trial & it is absurd at this time they haven't produced all the evidence!! Also, I don't agree with the Judge that this has to be sealed, it rest credibility to the process!! JMO!

It needs to go public

I am so sick of this circus of a trial so i can only begin to imagine how the most important people in this case feel.... the victins families! Justice for ❤maddie ❤ethan ❤kaylee ❤xana ❤🕊🕊🕊🕊

Idk, the state shouldn't be picking apart the evidence before handing it over.

I LOVE how Anne is no longer pulling her punches. In the beginning, while she has always done a great job, she was so overly respectful of the "feelings" of the prosecution, i.e. "I'm not saying the prosecution is doing this or that." Now, she's kicking ass and taking names. It's funny. Just as I was getting ready to click send, you stated the same thing. IMO, Bill's new name should be Bill Brady. 🙁

They arrested the defendant on information that they can't even provide. Imagine sitting in jail for a year and a half from a PCA that can't even be shown. Now who's delaying this trial?

Peter, excellent job breaking all of his down...I'd never understand all of this without your help! Thank you.....!

I totally believe the prosecution is hiding and withholding. Defense has been very patient!

I would like to know your thoughts on The state not physically having the evidence listed in PCA used for arrest warrant, and How did they arrest him and continue to hold him without that?

Is there any oversight entity that can be called to check on why Judge Judge is getting away with working for the Prosecution and not protecting the Defendant’s rights?

What balance is the judge talking about. He has been dead set against Bryan from day. No way in hell he doesnt know the corruption within that proecution.

Bill is still maddd about that PowerPoint 😂

When someone says they have “nothing to hide" Usually that’s exactly what they have. imho

I disagree with many things in the defense strategy. BUT if they dont have access to evidence used to arrest the guy, that are stated in the arrest affidavit, there is a big big problem. That should probably be the first things handed over to defense. Im not sure where I stand on this case, but I am uncomfortable with them not having the basics that should be available in the very start of the process. Makes me wonder how speedy trial would have gone.

I'm glad this one was public. Even though the next hearing will be closed, I still think this was a win for AT, giving her the opportunity to get out in the public what the Feds and prosecution aren't turning over. Sadly, I'm not confident that the media would report this hearing in an unbiased manner. Regardless, makes the prosecution, and even more so the Feds, look super shady and like they don't have as strong of a case as the media would like to portray.

Off topic...Can we all just agree that Judge Judge has the coolest Judge name out there?

If what AT is asking for does not exist how the hell did they have cause to arrest him in the first place? This is the question that everyone should be asking instead of following what the media is putting out there. Just shows how many people haven't got the sense of brains to do some research of their own to see what is actually going on in this case

The prosecution is mad because the TRUTH HURTS.

Peter, I truly appreciate your insight & how you break it all down for us. I'm learning the importance of being objective & observant of how & why a Judge allows or not, certain evidence. I have seen jurors in interviews referring to evidence they found out about after the trail that may have led to a different verdict. This is a bit perplexing. I hope that this will not happen in this case. Everything you offer is so valuable to potential jurors. In gratitude, life is beautiful 💜

Thank you so much for covering this. I really wanted your take on it and certain explanations.

I'm finding these hearings confusing and could never navigate this trial and pretrial by myself. Thank you for helping us make sense of it all, Peter! I often watch your videos a second time to try and get it all. I love learning all this law stuff!

I continue to be astonished how your stance has become much more open minded and objective. Early on, you seemed to be in the "Get the gurney and the needle- this dude is toast" camp but now you are showing a much more reasoned, balanced approach in your analysis- KUDOS to you.

The defense has filed 15 motions for discovery over the past year and a half and is still waiting. BK was essentially forced to waive his rights to a speedy trial due to the Prosecution's failure to turn over the discovery evidence which the defense not only has the right to have, they need it in ordee to prepare a proper defense to the state's allegations. He should never have had to waive his rights due to the failure of the prosecution in turning over the discovery evidence. That should have fallen on the state as a violation of his speedy trial rights. Also, the State never should have issued a request for an arrest warrant until they had evidence in their possession that they felt could prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. Why is BK having to sit in jail indefinitely waiting on the prosecution to have the evidence that they need in order to convict. Some of which is evidence they claimed to have had in the probable cause affidavit in order to show grounds for an arrest. Shouldn't said evidence have had to be presented to the ordering judge signing the affidavit for her to review prior to making the decision to sign the affidavit? So, if they had it then, why wouldn't they have it now? If they didn't have it then, why is the judge signing off on it? I dont believe they ever had it in their possession or that it was ever shown to the judge, this would mean they falsified claims within the affidavit in order to garner an arrest which is illegal and should have made the arrest affidavit null and void and the charges aginst BK to be dismissed if or until they have evidence against him. His rights continue to be violated and the state continues to claim they dont have the evidence that defense requests but admit that it exists. It doesn't work like that. The courts shouldn't be expected to just take the state's word for it. If the state claims this evidence as part of their discovery evidence then shouldn't they have seen the actual evidence first? If they had actually seen the evidence for themselves then they would surely have copies and records of it since they would have used it to put together their case, would they not? The fact seems that they do not have it in their possession, nor have they seen it or they would have record of it. If they dont have it, which they admit, then why is BK sitting behind bars? The only alternative to the above would be that they have it and are just refusing to turn it over which they can not do. I dont believe the latter is the case. I believe they thought they were going to have certain evidence supporting their claim that BK is the killer and jumped the gun and filed the charges agianst him and when the evidence didnt turn out to support their claims, they're now left not knowing what to do. They have a defendant thats been charged and evidence they claimed they had for the arrest but no actual evidence that backs up their claim. Its never existed. They assumed things would come together and tie BK to the case but it didnt. They know that it didn't but they feel its to late to turn back now but yet they can't move forward. They're at a stalemate and dont want the embarrassment of admitting they got it wrong. I dont believe they counted on Anne Taylor being as thorough and as knowledgeable as she actually is and now they realize she's figured things out and they're stalling because they dont know what to do. They're not prepared to move forward but there comes a point where they can not just continue to hold a defendant without any grounds. This is my takeaway from the shitshow that has gone on for the past year and a half, courtesy of Bill Thompson. If he had any faith in his case, he wouldn't get beet red everytime there's a pretrial hearing. He would present his discovery to the defense and get on with this. The public is neither blind nor stupid.

If the State has nothing to hide, then I guess the State has nothing! 🤣

You are awesome, also like the faster speed to get thru this rigamarole. Its a dynamic case, and learning legal aspects is filling the blanks. Tyvm

So, if he’s innocent, are the authorities looking for the real person who did this? Or will this tragedy ever be solved?

Great job on breaking this down for us Peter! I watched it on my own and was lost and you brought the meaning and the reasons why they were arguing. ❤

Watching both Lawyers , Bill is CLOSED arms crossed LOUD BRASH, Anne OPEN confident speaking clearly. Who you Trusting>? (observation)

She's not trying to try the case, she's trying to get information, that she's SUPPOSE to have! They wouldn't even be discussing this if they would give her what she's asking for.

LYK, what a wonderful opportunity we have here because you are on YT sharing your knowledge and i find it fascinating!!! TYSM❤

Yes, it is a trial including two very strong attorneys who know their way around. However, did the prosecution think the defense would just lay down? Now they have to bolster?

If it is in the affidavit then it should be in open court, not in previously disclosed in filings then it should remained sealed.

Current state-it was PROVEN that the Prosecution WAS withholding information and FAILED to perform necessary/required analysis and failed to turn over info to the Defense

If they have identifiable videos of him in his car near the house, and other smoking gun evidence like they are acting like they have....why not give the defense what they've been asking for all this time, and get this trial started. If he was there, there is no way that he could have proof that he was elsewhere. So why not give it to them, and see what he comes up with as proof of his alibi.

Maybe judge should say if the whole evidence isn't given no one can use anything associated with it.

I can’t understand why the FBI is holding information from the state (and the defence) which is apparently critical to their case. It seems so bizarre to me that the state OR the defence is not in possession of that information when they’ve built a case on it?

Nicely observed. I have only ever caught ransoms snippets of you here and there, but this video immediately had me hitting the subscribe button. I’ll browse your other videos as I find time, but already know that a lawyer who articulates exactly what he’s looking at and recognizes just how elegant the judge’s response was, is a voice I want to hear. Thanks, and keep up the good work. 😎

The State has been dickin the defense around the whole time in terms of discovery and the lead prosecutor gets butt hurt when Anne Taylor calls him out.

Defense lawyer is good.