Crime Stories with Nancy Grace

Episode: KOHBERGER TO SUE? DID HE ACT ALONE? DEMANDS BETTER JAIL?

Release Date: February 6, 2026

EPISODE OVERVIEW

In this episode, Nancy Grace explores the ongoing legal and psychological intrigue surrounding Bryan Kohberger, convicted for the brutal murders of four University of Idaho students. Grace and her panel unpack whether Kohberger acted alone, contend with new theories of a possible accomplice, discuss evidence both physical and emotional, and react to news of Kohberger's complaints about jail conditions and rumblings of a possible lawsuit.

KEY DISCUSSION POINTS & INSIGHTS

1. Emotional Toll and Evidence from Kaylee Goncalves' Family

• [04:33] Grace shares a moving moment featuring Kaylee’s mother, Christy Goncalves, who finds her daughter's sweatshirt and a crucial Grub Truck ticket from the night of the murders.
  • Nancy Grace reflects on the emotional gravity:

    “Just watching this, I don't even hear her right now. It just makes my stomach hurt. And it takes me back to some probative evidence that could have been used at trial…” (04:33)

• Investigator Chris McDonough’s View:
  • [07:41]

    “She is embracing that sweatshirt just to smell her daughter gives us an understanding of a depth of pain that nobody should ever experience.” (07:41)

  • McDonough also raises concerns that the Grub Truck receipt, found on Kaylee, was not used as trial evidence, seeing this as an investigative shortfall.

2. Did Kohberger Act Alone? Emerging Alternate-Suspect Theories

• Grace introduces growing online and legal speculation that Kohberger may not have acted alone ([10:44]).
• Howard Bloom (author of When the Night Comes Falling) adds nuance:
  • [17:38]

    “I'm not saying he acted alone. I'm saying the theory deserves attention… If you look at the devastation, this wasn't just a stabbing. This was a massacre…”

  • Bloom notes: 150+ stab wounds inflicted within 13 minutes, possible use of a second weapon, staging/cleanup of the scene, and lack of clear motive—suggesting these raise legitimate questions of a possible accomplice.

Panelists’ Counterarguments:

• Nancy Grace:
  • [18:48] (sarcastically)

    “So you're telling me, oh dear Lord in heaven…you're basing your theory on the fact that he's too skinny and scrawny to raise his arm 150 times?”

• Chris McDonough (Former Homicide Detective):
  • [22:03]

    “Based on…some of the evidence…Kohberger acted alone. I believe he straddled both of those girls…he blitzkrieged and attacked them.”

  • McDonough walks through the probable sequence of the attacks, pointing to forensic evidence.
• Dr. Bethany Marshall (Psychoanalyst):
  • [25:42]

    “He wanted the glory all for himself, right? Why would he share the moment of victory with another person?... That was his biggest achievement in his own life. It doesn't make sense.”

3. Alternate Theories and Their Weaknesses

• Bloom persists: the number of wounds, hints of staging/cleanup, mystery of motive, and possibility Kohberger may have been an "accomplice" himself ([24:36]).
• Dylan Mortensen's Survivor Testimony
  • Both Grace and investigative reporter Sydney Sumner cite survivor Dylan Mortensen’s consistent statements describing a single assailant (“someone dressed in black, pretty tall, with bushy eyebrows,” [31:54]).
• Philip Dube, Defense Attorney, offers skepticism:
  • [33:10]

    “There is absolutely no way that this one scrawny man can take down four people merely because he has a knife…”

  • Argues for the “partner/accomplice” theory, suggesting the alleged partner is likely dead.

4. Forensic Discussion: Was There More Than One Weapon?

• Dr. Kendall Crowns (Chief Medical Examiner):
  • [35:17]

    “With the description of the individuals that were killed, one of them has been possibly strangled and had her head kind of smashed…But the handle of the KA bar knife is actually quite thick and he could have used the actual knife that he was stabbing them with to also beat them…It’s easily done by one person.”

  • Stipulates that overlapping and chaotic wounds are not strong evidence for multiple attackers or weapons.
• Re: 150 Stab Wounds
  • Both Grace and panelists reference high-profile cases where women committed multiple stabbing murders (e.g., Jodi Arias), countering the notion that such violence must require multiple perpetrators ([41:31]).

5. DNA Evidence and Investigative Lapses?

• Howard Bloom's Critique:
  • Questions why some DNA samples (e.g., glove in parking lot, stairwell) weren't further analyzed ([45:37]).
• Susan Hendricks (Investigative Reporter):
  • Responds that the state did attempt to match DNA and highlights the high-traffic nature of the house—a “party house”—making irrelevant DNA finds likely ([46:02]).

6. Kohberger’s Jail Conditions and Lawsuit Speculation

• Nancy Grace: Outraged by Kohberger’s demands for better accommodations, stating,
  • [03:05]

    “You’re not getting the penthouse. Sweet, Kohberger. That’s not going to happen. Enjoy your gruel.”

• Discussion pivots to the “leaked jail video,” with speculation that Kohberger might sue the Idaho Department of Corrections for invasion of privacy ([47:46]).
  • Sidney Sumner notes:

    “He could sue IDOC…But Brian Coburger could come back and say that the prison owes him some kind of dam[ages]…”

  • Dr. Bethany Marshall:

    “All I see is power and control. If he can’t control the four victims that he slaughtered, now he's going to control the shoe in his jail cell.” (48:53)

  • Chris McDonough and Philip Dube both call the lawsuit idea “absurd,” noting that any civil deposition could force Kohberger to answer questions about the murders on record.

MEMORABLE QUOTES & MOMENTS

• Nancy Grace (Opening):

  “You may have received A's in high school and college, but you're gonna be getting big D's in prison. Brian effing Kohberger. He is whining...The nutritional standards are not being upheld. What? I don't care. It’s like, bleh, don't care. He doesn't like broccoli. Get used to it.” (02:57)

• Chris McDonough (on the emotional impact)

  “The fact that she is embracing that sweatshirt just to smell her daughter gives us an understanding of a depth of pain that nobody should ever experience.” (07:41)

• Howard Bloom (on the amount of violence):

  “This wasn't just a stabbing. This was a massacre. The four students were stabbed over 150 times in totality. I mean, try raising your hand 150 times...” (17:38)

• Dr. Bethany Marshall (psychoanalytic insight):

  “He wanted the glory all for himself… Why would he share the moment of victory with another person?” (25:42)

• Nancy Grace (on legal tactics):

  “So now not only is there another co-defendant, but that co-defendant is dead. Killed by Brian Coburger. But we just haven't found his body yet. So you're really taking this all… You're running with it.” (34:03)

• Philip Dube (on Kohberger’s threat to sue):

  “The ultimate doomsday sanction could result, which is a dismissal of his case with prejudice.” (51:53)

TIMESTAMPS FOR IMPORTANT SEGMENTS

• Kaylee Goncalves’ mother and lost evidence: 04:33 – 09:43
• Theories of an accomplice & “Was anyone else arrested?”: 10:44 – 14:06
• Howard Bloom expounds the “not alone” theory: 17:38 – 24:36
• Panel tackles plausibility of two assailants: 21:34 – 27:16
• Survivor Dylan Mortensen’s crucial eyewitness account: 31:17 – 32:50
• Forensic analysis with Dr. Kendall Crowns: 35:17 – 36:32; 41:05
• Evaluation of DNA evidence and party house context: 45:37 – 46:55
• Kohberger’s jail complaints and possible lawsuit: 47:46 – 51:53

CONCLUSION

Nancy Grace and her expert panel vigorously debate whether Bryan Kohberger could have committed the University of Idaho murders alone, systematically deconstructing new defense-driven theories of an accomplice. The episode balances sharp legal insight, forensic reasoning, and the raw emotions of survivors and victims’ families. The overall consensus leans toward skepticism of the accomplice theory, reaffirming the idea that one individual—driven by control, rage, and possibly sexual motivation—could indeed have committed the atrocity solo. Meanwhile, the specter of Kohberger suing for jail “hardships” is met with scorn and dissected as another expression of his need for power and control.

Podcast Tone:
True crime realism, emotionally charged, unsparing, and at times bitingly sarcastic, with a mix of victim advocacy and tough legal analysis.