It was already ruined gathering evidence. They smashed out entire walls. I doubt it would be effective for showing the scene to jurors. That said, nobody has gathered enough evidence. They need more experts in before it goes. Really, they should have gotten their 3D info before they took structural parts for sampling. Overconfidence. I think the defense might have, initially, neglected this on purpose. If they have evidence, they have to share. As long as the prosecution shrugged their shoulders the defense could, too. That defense attorney might be the best in the state. Prosecution gathers more evidence, defense does too.
Nothing about the law is a “slam dunk”! The jury is always an unknown. What evidence will be allowed in is always up for debate. No evidence should be destroyed, including the house.
I agree with the victims statement. It’s better to have the house up and not need it than have it demolished and need it. Why are they, both sides, still going to the house. Mistake on so many levels.
@AlphaFoxAdam I would prefer the real thing vs. a virtual house. Some of us think critically and would naturally wonder why a nearby crime scene couldn't be preserved since someone's life is literally on the line. A model isn't going to give the same insight, especially regarding acoustics.
It’s completely unrealistic as a juror to expect every time scene to be kept in perpetuity, while court cases go on. And any jar going into a case assuming that things are being hidden, doesn’t belong on the jury panel.
@lisaspencer1057 It's hard not to notice things being hidden in this particular case. The defense still hasn't received all of discovery, and how many times have they asked? Also, some of the victims' families have verbalized that they don't want it torn down at this point.
You must be talking about that defense team that also lied about exculpatory evidence, the FBI “interrogating” their malcontent expert witness and put forth the most shameless “alibi” known to court proceedings. Almost every militant BK supporter claims “critical” thinking skills, when they are indeed not using them at all. To view nearly every matter involving this case through the lens of corruption FIRST, is conspiratorial thinking masquerading as critical thinking. You all like to throw this around as if you are above a proper consideration of the FACTS in this case (which is a conspiracy in itself) And through this we are treated to circular logic ad nauseam-well the facts arent really the facts and there is no real evidence, beyond what LE has labeled “evidence”. With no benefit of actually viewing the crime scene and all the evidence discovered, without a shred of evidence that corruption has occurred, this intellectually lazy narrative continues. It is a slap in the face to the victims families as you deny there very reality
Ethan's Mother has stated them doing anything isn't going to change anything. I disagree. I'm with SG on this one. Keep the house up, it is the biggest piece of evidence. I believe the University wants it down to not discourage potential students.$$$$$ That house still holds evidence.
Exactly my thoughts, too! Yep, it's rarely conspiracies but very often about $$$. Has anyone looked into how much, if any, the application rate has dropped for UI in Moscow? My guess is they are on the verge of bankruptcy. I wouldn't apply for anything there, who would??
It's also the president house that he grew up in . He lives up by the water tower .an the tree are cut down only in that area so those using that road can see that house everyday .weird very weird ?
The defence did see it…what are you talking about? One trial goes to see the crime scene and everyone things that everyone needs to go see every crime scene. LOL
I agree with others that the house should remain until after trial. Even with some of the interior removed, things like plywood for flooring/walls could be erected inside temporarily so the jurors could get a better sense of proximity of rooms, width of hallways, distance from kitchen sliding door where he supposedly entered, etc. That just can't be visualized/felt from a model or 3-D style graphic.
Very painful to know this news…. Hope the Judge stands up for this case and order to not touch this house until the trial is over… prayers for justice.
My guess is the defense team went back into the house to record data and compare it with their previous survey in order to figure out if the FBI removed any more materials from the house by comparing the new photos with their original photos, and the crime scene pictures. This way they're not caught off guard, and or can ask for further discovery in necessary.
I agree with you, @peter. It should stay up until the trial is over. You never know what might pop up and also, the 3D version is not at all the same as the actual house. I absolutely think the Jury may want to see the layout for themselves, to get a better idea of the happenings. I would think that ANYONE, including the President, would want it to be there if needed in the future. Like the quote you read, about 'better' to have in case needed.
I live in the area and work very close to the house. I will guarantee you that you will have a really hard time Finding a person who doesn't know anything about this case in this area. I also would want the house left up also if I was a family member.
Really really want you to continue covering this case please, Peter. It’s gone crazy over the last year and your sane and professional insight is so appreciated, thank you
What are they trying to hide? I have never heard of a crime scene being destroyed before the trial (or, police returning the victims belongings to their families!). Very hinky things happening here has my suspicious up. Jmo
I think the jury needs to see/tour the actual crime scene! I realize it’s a sad reminder of what happened in the house. Evidence should NOT be destroyed until after the trial!! Justice for the kids should be the # 1 concern. People can’t destroy crime scenes just because seeing it makes them uncomfortable. The university is more concerned with their own agenda than justice for the kids!! This crime has probably cost the university millions of dollars in lost revenue. They want to move on and put this behind them and having the house as a constant reminder is going to continue to cost them money. I’m terribly sorry for the University and everyone involved. But people need to stand up for those that can no longer speak for themselves. Don’t destroy EVIDENCE! The murderer needs to be convicted before the house comes down!!! Please🙏🏼
The woke hive mind continues and the universities throughout our country are destroying young minds. This trial has not even started and they are crying that it’s too sad to see the house. WRF. How do you think the families feel who had to bury their vibrant young children. They never get to see them again. This is beyond the pale! The house needs to stand until a verdict comes in. He most likely will be found guilty and they can destroy the house then. He will appeal. The university should be ashamed of themselves that they would want to destroy potential evidence and jurors may need to look at the home. They keep reporting that the lay out pf the house is odd and it would be better to actually walk the home then to look at the blue prints or schematics. The house stays up until justice is served for these families. Tell the university to go to their safe place room and color in some coloring books, if that does not work issue each one a pacifier. We did not have safe spaces when I was in college back in the late eighties. This is disgusting they have no regard to the feelings of the families. Grow the hell up!! House needs to stay. Demolishing the home does not bring the victims back. What is the #1 reason they want it torn down? Why are you destroying potential evidence?
I totally agree. The house shouldn’t be destroyed until after the trial. If I was a juror, I’d would like to see the crime scene, if only to get a feel for distances between rooms, the kitchen, murder/witness rooms, etc.
Jurors rarely go to a crime scene, google the stats. It is not up to the jurors, the pros’ or def’ must request a jury view, the Judge decides. In this case Ann & Bill do not intend to ask the Judge if the jury can tour. Neither care if it goes down.
Exactly. They reported that the set up of the floors and rooms was no ordinary so I think the jurors need to see it to better understand how he was able to navigate the rooms and not be heard so easily or walk past the one girl and not notice her. How terrifying and creepy. Those poor students.
This is not a simple or normal house, IMO. It is a multiple level house built into a hill with different points of entry on different levels. I can very easily see this house described in a trial multiple ways. Some might call that first level the basement, some might then call it the first level, some might call it the front door but hey, you have two rooms and a staircase up to the main level so this isn’t really the main level it is really bedrooms and a staircase. The back door is where the kitchen is located but they also used it as an entry to the house and that is where the Door Dash driver delivered the food that night, to my understanding. You have multiple people in a trial using different words for the same thing or even different things. I say keep it just for this alone. T ✌🏻
Good point, I don’t want to see the home demolished before the trial, I just contemplated the length of time until the trial….but yes it’s not a normal house, it’s multi level, and think that in reality it needs to stay put until AFTER the trial……no matter who might be uncomfortable in the community about the house still standing atm. Justice for the four victims IS the most important thing. 💔💔💔🙏🏻
I don’t support the house being taken down prior to trial. I think there are so many “what ifs.” Thank you for covering this, always appreciate a lawyers perspective.
My question is always that since Brian is considered innocent until proven guilty why not wait until after the trial incase someone else has to go to trial. In the slim chance of that and more defense lawyers needing it?
The house should remain standing until after the trial and the jurors should be walked through while being told how the crime was committed. This will give them a much clearer and more thorough understanding of this heinous crime.
I still have problems with the remaining roommates not calling the police right away. Unless they were taught not to trust the police, the first thing I'm going to do is try and find out why a stranger was in the house and if anything or anyone was disturbed and if so, call the police right away, the sooner the better because if someone can get into the house, I'm safer with the police knowing, driving by a lot, and investigating. She had no idea if the killer was going to come back for her so getting the police there would be vital. Unless she had something to hide or knew the killer. They should not destroy the evidence until the case is closed.
IMO even if only one parent wants the house up for the trial, it should stay till the jury is done. What's the rush?? Ethan's mom should support the other parents too. She's been focused on moving on since shortly after the murders, but not every parent is ready to do that yet.
The Jurors will think differently depending the direction of the trial. If any wrong doings, cover ups, etc is brought up, knocking the house down just fosters hiding things. (This is absolutely who can tell the best story vs what the actual house has to truly offer)
I don’t think they should tear it down until after the trial. Even though they did a Faro scan, it’s not the same. Understandably, the acoustics will be very different, the distances would remain the same and I think that’s important. I hope they leave up.
I need to hold and read and see the evidence for myself. I don't trust ANYONE's version of the truth in something as serious as this. It HAS to be the RIGHT GUY.
The prosecution had said last time that because the interior has been altered so much, floorboards gone, walls removed, different acoustics, that a visit by the jury could actually confuse them. No one is talking about this. I don't think anyone would want a confused jury.
Ethan’s family wants little to do with the trial or the case.. just can’t imagine doing that if that was my child, but people are different. They need to keep the house up for jurors. The house layout is already odd and hard to comprehend.
They might just bot be able to focus on it and keep it together. I think if this happened to someone in my family I would be closely following the trial but... people cope differently.
I had seen clips previously that justify tearing it down due to costs. I interpreted it to be like an attractive nuisance. They are paying for full time security protection. There are people trying to break in, and/or vandalize it. The school has put forward the wrong message from the very first day over a year ago. They were terrified that they would have a bad reputation and immediately told everyone that it was safe, despite no one being arrested yet. They are a political and financial animal that only pay lip service to the actual tragic loss of four young people that were just starting their lives. You don't get rid of a large piece of evidence just because you are dealing with criminal behavior, and that it might cause awkward questions during admissions process. Instead, you publicly shame any person that dares to go near the place and/or physically disrespect the property in any way. This is an opportunity to be the grownups, and to emphasize how to be a good citizen and community member. It's also an opportunity to emphasize the updates to security and how the school and community came together. If I was a parent, I would not be leery of sending my kids to that university because of what happened in that house. That is something that could happen anywhere. No community is immune from crime. I *would* be leery of a school administration that cares more for its image rather that being proactive, transparent, and truthful. The school administration is what will lead to a lack of safety in the future, IMHO. Their instinct is to react to negative items, "brush it under the rug," rather than to face them, find solutions, and to use them as learning opportunities.
I totally agree!! They should be bending over backwards to ensure that justice is served for 4 of their students. Their lives were dedicated to that school and their parents trusted they would come home after they graduated. If the security costs are too much for a very established school.. then have a police officer there who are already on the force getting a salary.
House is evidence and should stay. Jury should be able to see angles, what is visible from where, judge proximities, distances, walk the terrain from alleged parking place, see what BF could see from her window, what DM could see from her door, distance to the Sigma frat and neighbors, and there is always a chance there can be overlooked evidence and questions answered by physically being on the property. They are covering up the truth. Bodies should have not been cremated either. Put a wall around it if people don't want to see it. If the state would have not obstructed discovery, trial would be going on now. If I were a juror I would want to be on the property.
I think they need to leave it up until after the trial. I can’t wrap my mind around one person being able to kill 4 people and no one noticed anything did he drug everyone in the house? There has been no evidence of that, but how was that possible? Surely someone would have seen that their roommate was being attacked and yelled or something. I don’t understand
My concern is how could four people be murdered, 4 healthy young women and man, and DM did not get any sense of something horrific happening. Beyond normal college kid shenanigans. I would want to see the locations of all the rooms an acoustics and walking through the house. BK maybe guilty but was he the only one?
Hi Peter, I'm from Moscow, ID, graduated from University of Idaho in 2011 and here is my take on the comment Steve makes about having been told by prosecution that the ideal juror for the case would be "a farmer who is too busy to have seen all the media coverage or watch TV about the case." I believe the reason why this statement may have been given as a likely "positive" for the prosecution has more to do with the demographics of Latah County rather than guilt vs. innocent perception in media of Kohberger. We are largely a farming and logging community in this area of the Idaho panhandle. And Since a change of venue has not been requested(crazy in my opinion) I am assuming this statement was trying to convey that the prosecution is hoping for many of the selected jurors to be residents of the county from outside the city of Moscow. When you take into consideration that Latah County population est. For 2020 was roughly 41,000 (35,000 over the age of 18). We are very rural, the census states for the whole of the county, our population breakdown per square mole is only a total of 36 people. But by comparison the city of Moscow itself makes up a 21,000 of the total county population and that does not include the 11,000 students the University of Idaho has on campus during the school year, 61% of which are in-state student residents and therefore could be called to serve if their DMV address reflects their student housing address even if their permanent address is in another part of the state. (I.e. a Boise student uses their parent address for their permanent address but has their apartment in Moscow address listed on their newest ID while attending school at U of I.) All in all that makes the Moscow city juror pool a large percentage of our total for the county and more likely to be dismissed from serving on the jury because of the impact the case has had on our day to day lives here in town vs the smaller, rural communities else where in the county. Hope that gives a little clarity to the circumstances I assume the statement was being made within context of our little slice of Idaho here in Moscow. Happy Holidays to you and yours!
I think they need to keep it available until the trial is over. The jury needs the opportunity to have at minimum a walk through during the trial. Nothing compares to seeing this location in person. Feeling like an easy decision to me.
The court should decide what should be done with the house. The victims’ families should be consulted and respected but ultimately the court should decide. The prosecution and defense should be able to veto the destruction until the trial is over. If they agree, tear it down.
I understand the feeling of remembering the carnage that happened at the home. But BETTER TO HAVE IT & not need it than NEED IT & NOT HAVE IT !! ( This is what I call the SWEATER THEORY ) it’s ALWAYS better to have it cause there could be a storm ☔️ brewing and you don’t want to get caught out in the rain.
Please keep covering this case. It is the reason I started following you. I don’t think taking the house down is the right choice until the trial is over.
Peter.. I totally agree with you.. A visit to the scene of a crime,,,any crime.. can make a real difference. It did in the Murdaugh case…and others,,, Once thst hiuse is hind it;s gone. No model can ever have the same ambiance…
I think it's totally stupid to demolish the house before the case has gone to trial and there is an outcome. There is no 100% guarantee that the prosecution is going to win. What if BK is found innocent and they later find another suspect. That house will no longer be available to the new defense team.
I think the prosecution is just feeding SG bullsh*t to keep him quiet. Even though allegedly SG has seen leaked video of a white vehicle, DOES NOT mean there is absolute proof the white vehicle is BK inside unless they can actually see him. Even still, if so, driving around is not a crime. To me, the white vehicle they are showing could be LE in their white cars. There is NO reason to destroy the house; if BK did not do it & I don’t think he did, then you can’t go back with another defendant because the house is gone… it does not make any sense that a judge would allow such a thing. It is better to err on the side of keep it up until there is true justice for all those beautiful kids. If I was a juror, I would 100% want to walk through the house! I would like to know why the original owner of the house gave it to the college. That part does not make sense to me either. Did he do it to get the spotlight off himself? Unless I am wrong, it is weird that there has been no mention the white Elantra found in another state that was linked to the 1122 address, how LE square one very quickly said there is no connection - when there was a connection!!! It is like they want us to believe what they are saying no questions asked. It does not work that way.
If you disconnect utilities until the court may possibly need to visit it - how is it costing money ? I think it needs to stay standing - the acoustics and how no one heard or seen anything is still a huge question for me. Also thought they were going to make a memorial there not another home where rental income would come into play
The biggest doubt I still have is how one person BK brutally murdered one person while the other victim was still alive and not causing a ruckus. The dog was silent too…. As EDB says ‘ I have so many questions’
There was a ruckus upstairs, but DM had no ability to fathom it. Dog barked after loud thump, vocalizations and whimpers from Xanas room. All victims had strikes to upper body-if that is chest and neck, they have lost ability to vocalize. Ethans body is outlined in blood on the mattress from xanas room-he likely didnt wake. While Kaylee and Xana were probably ambushed swiftly. It is only lay people without benefit of crime scene analysis and expertise who deny these real world possibilities.
Seems to me there is something fishy about this case from both the State & Defense. Peter given your experience & what we don't know may be why I think something is very off. I'm not convinced State has enough evidence to convict BK so they are giving themselves a way out. So many questions 🤷♀️
I hope Maverick feels better-- Schools out for winter break soon! Dont want him to miss any fun. Thanks for the Sunday live, Peter. Looks like I just missed it.
I believe the house should stand until after the trial and he is found guilty! Knocking it down will cause problems for some of the jury. There's nothing like the real thing, was without it could cause him to walk
The house itself is incredibly important! Just seeing how Bryan could have parked on that upper parking lot and stalk his victims… the layout and distance between the victims and how Bryan easily navigated the house. Ethan’s mom has no positive connection with the house but the girls parents…the girls who lived there have a completely different perspective because that was their last home. I’m going to go with Steve Goncalvez on this one.
It’s his daughter. I can’t imagine his guilt for not protecting her. Even though, logically there’s no way he could. He has said I’m going to protect her so many times. My heart goes out to these families
As a potential juror. It would be helpful to tour the house. To assess the crime layout, house & room acoustics of voice, I'm a "visual learner" a house model, drawing or pictures. Is different than viewing the actual site. Why does the University appear impatient on a decision to destroy the crime scene.🤷♀️
Thank you Peter. Wishing Maverick better. Whatever decision is made regarding demolishing the house is bound to upset someone. I feel very sorry for all the parents.
I think for evidentiary reasons it would be wrong to tear it down until after the trial. You never know what may come up and you can't undo it once it is torn down.
genuine question: is it actually that expensive to keep the house up? seems like everyone's ok with it being demolished post-trial so what's the harm in leaving it up until there is a verdict?
The fact is they aren’t building another property there after it’s torn down. Imo that means that they aren’t going to be getting any income from it anyways whether the house is up or not. I don’t have a clue about some stuff, but with the lot empty or if they keep the house up would cost the same, or similar. Unless they have changed whether they are building something on it again. I thought it was just supposed to be a memorial garden.
The "not guilty possibility" is the largest argument against keeping the property as it is until there is a conviction and appeals are exhausted in my opinion.
I’m not sure if the house should be demolished yet but at the same time I’m not convinced BK did it. There are too many things that don’t make sense and I have too many questions.
It needs to stay up until trial is over and the person is found guilty and in prison. If I were a juror on this trial, I would like to see the house, and do a walk through. In person is better in my opinion. You also would get the feeling of it all. Also, isn't there an old saying Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
I can’t believe they are destroying this house before the trial. I happened on another Yt video a few weeks ago that raised questions about when the police were called. Don’t remember much else about the video, I was driving. If I were a juror, I’d want to see the house to visualize how it happened per the evidence. I would imagine this is grounds for a mistrial.
I agree the house needs to stay! I would want to see how Dylan’s door open to see him, have someone talk to see how well she can hear in her room. Many unknowns.
It seems to me the jury being able to see the area, going in the house and seeing the layout. How close were the rooms on the 3rd floor. The location of the back door to the second floor rooms. I am a visual person, telling me something is 25 feet, doesn't compute, by seeing the 25 feet i can put it in perspective. 25 feet is an example. That back lot is really close to the back of the house, not sure how many feet. I find it odd that the two rooms the murders happened in were both on the backside of the house.
There is no going back if u destroy it and then for some reason u wish it was still there. But u can always demolish it later. One option leaves room for all the what ifs!.. The other option closes certain doors forever and there is no coming back from.
Rewatch crew here!! I think Steve was saying the ideal juror in any case would be just that- a person with no knowledge and no chance of a bias. I don't think he was saying g that's his ideal juror. Just one that nobody could ever question re: a bias.
@@mischaraine1645 I’m not saying I know better. I’m saying that no one knows what may come up in the future and that it doesn’t seem wise to destroy evidence prior to trial.
@@mischaraine1645 It’s that “degree of certainty” I’m thinking of when I say that, in my opinion, it would be foolish to destroy the house prior to trial. It will hurt nothing to make absolutely sure that the house isn’t needed during trial. In any case, it looks like you and I will just need to agree that we disagree.
@@susuburleson878 I take that as a no. But you are expecting the university to. Everyone is very free when it isn’t their money. Hypocrites. Put your money where your mouth is or shut your ignorant face.
