What’s Been Hidden in the Idaho Murders? Matt Murphy Breaks It Down

Summary

Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield

Episode Title: What’s Been Hidden in the Idaho Murders? Matt Murphy Breaks It Down
Release Date: July 21, 2025

---

Introduction

In this compelling episode of Drop Dead Serious, host Ashleigh Banfield engages in a profound discussion with Matt Murphy, a former Orange County prosecutor with extensive experience in high-profile serial killer and murder cases. The focus of their conversation centers on the mysterious Idaho murders, exploring the newly accessible evidence and unraveling the complexities surrounding the case.

Unveiling the Idaho Murders

Ashleigh opens the conversation by highlighting the significance of the Idaho murders case, noting that for the first time since the incidents, thousands of pages of evidence are becoming available after being restricted by a gag order. She emphasizes the importance of this evidence in understanding the depths of the investigation and the potential revelations awaiting the public.

Ashleigh Banfield (00:04): "There is a lot of evidence that the public has not been allowed to see. And to break down what we can expect if or when that gag order is lifted, what's at stake, what surprises might actually be waiting in those files?"

Motive and Behavioral Analysis

Matt Murphy delves into the psychological profile of Bryan Coburger, the accused, drawing parallels with known psychopaths. He discusses the lack of a sexual component in Coburger’s actions, which is atypical compared to most serial killers who often have sexually motivated crimes.

Matt Murphy (03:09): "This has all the hallmarks of a psychopath... Those are going to be really informative. Basically, every single thing that the public has not been allowed to see."

Ashleigh speculates on the possible motivations behind the murders, considering scenarios where Coburger might have initially targeted one victim but ended up killing more due to unforeseen circumstances.

Death Penalty Considerations

A significant portion of the discussion revolves around the potential imposition of the death penalty. Matt Murphy shares his insights from his tenure as a prosecutor, explaining the stringent criteria required for death sentences, such as zero doubt of guilt and the presence of aggravating circumstances.

Matt Murphy (14:42): "The murders have to be shocking and brutal where justice essentially demands the ultimate penalty, at least on paper."

Ashleigh questions whether the dynamic would differ if Coburger were sentenced to death row instead of life imprisonment, contemplating the psychological impacts on a psychopath facing execution.

Psychopathy and Lack of Empathy

Matt elaborates on the traits of psychopaths, referencing Dr. Hare’s Hair Psychopathy Checklist and discussing how a fundamental lack of empathy distinguishes these individuals from the general population. He underscores the challenge in envisioning remorse or guilt in such perpetrators.

Matt Murphy (07:22): "These guys really do tend to adjust, and going to prison was part of the calculated risk."

Impact of Online Sleuths and Public Perception

The conversation shifts to the role of online communities and sleuths in shaping public perception. Matt expresses concern over the misinformation spread by groups like the "Pro Burgers," who support Coburger despite overwhelming evidence of his guilt.

Matt Murphy (34:12): "If you are the victim's family in that, that is brutal for them."

Ashleigh highlights the emotional toll on survivors and victim families, criticizing the internet's lack of empathy towards those who endured the horrors of the murders.

Crime Scene Evidence and Forensic Analysis

Ashleigh poses a technical question regarding the forensic evidence, specifically the reported small shoe print of blood outside Dylan Mortensen's room, which seems inconsistent with the violent nature of the crime.

Ashleigh Banfield (43:19): "I don't understand how there could be just one very small tiny shoe print of blood and not a river of evidence..."

Matt responds by discussing possible explanations, drawing from his experience with similar cases, and underscores the uncertainty until official crime scene reports are unsealed.

Victim Impact Statements and Legal Proceedings

The discussion touches on the emotional weight of victim impact statements during sentencing, with Ashleigh pondering whether such statements affect the convicted’s psyche.

Ashleigh Banfield (56:16): "I almost wonder if it's more effective to have a statement read by someone else..."

Matt agrees, explaining that these statements allow families to express their grief directly to the defendant, which can be both cathartic for them and impactful on the sentencing process.

Legal Defense and Appellate Process

Matt provides insights into the role of defense attorneys in capital cases, emphasizing the necessity of a robust defense to uphold the integrity of the judicial system. He discusses the rigorous appellate process for death penalty cases and the challenges faced by defense teams in such high-stakes environments.

Matt Murphy (40:07): "Regardless of how you feel about the case or our system of justice, that is a noble thing to do because they're trying to save somebody's life."

Concluding Thoughts and Future Discussions

As the episode wraps up, Ashleigh and Matt reflect on the complexities of the case and the broader implications for justice and public safety. Ashleigh expresses her intent to return with Matt for further analysis once more information becomes available, underscoring the ongoing public interest and the necessity for transparency in the judicial process.

Ashleigh Banfield (59:58): "We deserve to know when and how we can be the most safe with our families, our friends and our loved ones."

Matt Murphy (59:58): "Happy to come on anytime, Ashley. I love your show."

---

Notable Quotes

• Ashleigh Banfield (00:04): "This is one of those conversations that I covet. Super in depth, really, really informative..."

• Matt Murphy (03:09): "This has all the hallmarks of a psychopath... He's obsessed with one of these beautiful young women."

• Ashleigh Banfield (05:20): "Maybe he had a plan that went awry and had to quickly silence witnesses."

• Matt Murphy (07:22): "There's a thing called the Hair Psychopathy Checklist... a classic American psychopath."

• Ashleigh Banfield (11:04): "It sucks to be in a cell... facing 60 years of the same monotony every single day."

• Matt Murphy (14:42): "The cases have to be shocking and brutal where justice demands the ultimate penalty."

• Ashleigh Banfield (34:12): "The cruelty that the Internet leveled upon this poor young woman."

• Matt Murphy (43:19): "Sometimes you're going to get that if you step in the blood."

---

Key Takeaways

• The Idaho murders case is shedding new light as previously sealed evidence becomes accessible, potentially offering deeper insights into the motive and actions of Bryan Coburger.
• Psychological analysis suggests Coburger exhibits classic psychopathic traits, complicating the understanding of his motivations.
• The decision-making process regarding the death penalty is complex, balancing legal criteria and the emotional weight carried by victim families.
• Online communities play a significant role in shaping public perception, sometimes at the expense of factual accuracy and empathy towards victims.
• Forensic evidence remains a pivotal aspect of criminal investigations, though interpretations can vary until official reports are made public.
• Victim impact statements serve as a crucial emotional outlet for families, influencing sentencing outcomes.
• The appellate process in death penalty cases is rigorous, ensuring that judgments are thoroughly examined, though it can be emotionally taxing for all parties involved.

Final Thoughts

This episode provides a nuanced exploration of a harrowing criminal case, blending legal expertise with empathetic insights into the human aspects of justice. Ashleigh Banfield and Matt Murphy's dialogue underscores the importance of transparency, rigorous investigation, and compassionate understanding in the pursuit of justice.

Transcript

[Matt Murphy]

Foreign.

[Ashley Banfield]

Hey everyone, I'm Ashley Banfield. Welcome back to another episode of Drop Dead Serious. I think you're gonna love today's conversation. Honestly, this is one of those conversations that I covet. Super in depth, really, really informative from one of the smarter people who knows his shit, for lack of a better description. And I wanted to have this conversation with my guest. There's just so much I don't know and all of us don't know that getting inside the mind of a homicide prosecutor really, really sort of helps to get closer. You probably know this, but for the first time since the murders in Moscow, Idaho, thousands of pages of evidence that have been hidden behind a sweeping gag order. I think there will be things that stay under a gag order and that is for the dignity of the victims. Right. But generally speaking, I think the public has been held back so much from a public process. I can't see a real reason to keep the majority of the investigative information secret. But if you're thinking about the work product over the last two and a half years on that Brian Coburger murder case, search warrants, forensic reports, GPS data, phone records, witness interviews. Wow. I mean, witness interviews, those kids that showed up on the scene that morning and discovered the disastrous situation that befell 1122 King Road. Those are going to be really informative. Basically every single thing that the public has not been allowed to see. And to break down what we can expect if slash when that gag order is lifted, what's at stake, what surprises might actually be waiting in those files? I called Matt Murphy. Matt is a former Orange county prosecutor who has tried some of the most high profile serial killer and murder cases in Calif. And he's so insightful because he doesn't just do the job, he really thinks through the job and he's so analytical and he followed the Idaho murders from the get go. And so he has had the same kinds of questions that you and I have had, but way more like the kinds of questions I might not have even thought to ponder. And so I wanted you to be a part of this conversation with Matt, especially while we're in the crux of possibly find out the mysteries that have kept us all transfixed by the Idaho murders. Here's Matt and my conversation. I have so many questions. I mean, I think everybody, we all have so many questions, not the least of which is motive. Who knows if we'll ever know that that's not going to likely be in the gag order. But do you expect that we might actually get somewhere that There might have been some writings or some digital material that the police found in their investigation that leads us to understand a little bit more of why Brian Coburger did this to these four innocent kids.

[Matt Murphy]

Well, I sure hope so. And of course, with the gag order in place, a lot of the information that we've had that we've heard has been via rumor. It has not been introduced in anything that's been released yet. Nothing in search warrants. But, you know, this is. This has all the hallmarks of a psychopath. Right? And this is just my opinion here. This is based on my experience, but there are certain hallmarks of this kind of murder. And he appears to have been obsessed with one of these beautiful young women, and he's following her on social media. When the DA Was going through some of the facts, it looks like they figured out where he was parking his car, he'd been to the house several times. All that stuff that's been publicly made available to us. But I've heard rumors of certain searches on adult websites. I don't know if that's true or not, but the vast majority of your classic serial killer is. Are, you know, they're sexually motivated crimes. Now, whether we're ever going to get those answers or not, I don't know. That has not been made public. But I can tell you I did 13 of these guys over the course of my 17 years, and there was a sexual component on almost every single one of them. Not everyone, but the vast majority. And of course, we see that with the Bundys, with the Dahmers, with the dating gang killer, Rodney Alcala, which was one of mine, with the Golden State killer, Joseph d', Angelo, also one of mine. Like there were. There was a sexual component to every one of those. Now, what I thought was very interesting in this is this. D. A took pains to say there was no sexual assault, but he didn't just leave it at that. He said there was no sexual component. Now, that's a very broad term. I don't know if that. If. If that meant he was talking about what happened actually at the murder scene, in which case I have no problem believing that. But component, the way he said it, that seemed very broad. That no sexual component to me means there's no evidence of a sexual motive. And I don't know. I don't know if it was appropriate for him to say that because I don't think he can tell us or there's any way that he would know what was actually going on in the mind of Coburger. When he went into the house.

[Ashley Banfield]

Or maybe he misused the word. Maybe he did mean at the actual crime scene. And I go through all sorts of scenarios in my mind, not the least of which is that perhaps one person was the target. I think Matty Mogan. And lo and behold, Kaylee was in the bed as well. So it was a bigger job than he had planned for. And suddenly he might have heard a noise after doing what he did to these two, and encountered Zanna Kernodle on the way down the stairs and perhaps walked or chased after her because she'd seen him. And then lo and behold, after he had taken care of this witness discovers there's another. A fourth victim who needs to be silenced. I don't know why, then he wouldn't have silenced Dylan Mortensen. But maybe he didn't see her. It was dark, so who knows, right? Maybe he had planned to take out Maddie and do something else, but everything went awry and he found himself having to use his very quick mind and his criminal justice to try to take out witnesses quickly and then decided it's time to go. Do. Do you see any validity in that?

[Matt Murphy]

Oh, I, I think that that's. Look, and this is just based, based on what I know that's been released publicly. I think that's spot on. I, you know, and I've said this before, there's the great philosopher Mike Tyson. Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face. And I think his plan was targeting one. And remember, remember what we learned is that her, she. Sometimes they would sleep in the same bed. And so he walks in expecting to find one, and there's two women there and. And the whole thing goes pear shaped, whatever his plan was. And I think you're exactly right. And I think it was loud, it was unexpected, There's a dog in there. And now all of a sudden there's this six foot four, awesome young kid, Ethan, who's in the mix. And I think he was surprised by all of that, if I had to guess. I think that that is a very reasonable interpretation of the evidence. And look, this is part of the problem with this AG Order. We just don't know. We don't know what information they have yet. And I for one, can't wait to, to dive into these reports.

[Ashley Banfield]

I mean, and let's hope, and I always come back to Papa Roger, and I am so desperate to find out if the police forensically were able to find on any of his devices in Pennsylvania or back, you know, in, in Idaho, that There is a connection between him and Papa Roger. Because if that's the case, then I think we're starting to know. He talked about, you know, questioning the audience in the case discuss group, the Idaho murderous case discussion group. He talked about. Does anyone think there was a sexual component here? You know, I think he left the sheath behind. I think he drove up the side of the house and then made his entrance through the back. Well, all that turned out to be true. And then he started to red herring the white car. Instead of calling it an Elantra, he just started to call it a white car. Oh, it's nothing to see here. I think if Papa Roger is Bryan Kohberger, the white Elantra started to make him fearful. He started to realize, they're onto me. I need to shut this down and get the hell out. Or at least drive people away from thinking about me.

[Matt Murphy]

Well, did you see the photos that were released of him in the black hoodie? And then there's another one where he's giving a selfie thumbs up. They were able to time. Yeah, they were able to date stamp that and timestamp that to immediately after the murders. I think both of those. And that, again, has all the hallmarks. There's a thing that you encounter in the prosecution of psychopaths called the Hair Psychopathy Checklist. And it's a famous psychiatrist, Dr. Hare, who put together a list of the most prevalent personality traits of a psychopath. And one of those is narcissism, grandiosity, lack of empathy. And in Coburger's writings which were released, remember, there was those things that he. Those letters, he talks about how, you know that. The way he speaks about himself. I think that there are forensic psychiatrists and psychologists across the country who are. Who are just going, yep, that is kind of your classic American psychopath. And it's that fundamental lack of empathy that really separates those guys from the rest of humanity. And it's also important to remember, Ashley, that a lot of us and a lot of your viewers, we look at these guys and there's this thing called anthropomorphism where we put human traits or human thoughts onto animals. It's almost the same thing. We engage in the same thing when it comes to psychopaths because we project our own guilt, our own feelings, our own, you know, sense of right and wrong on them. And one of the things that you hear most commonly as a prosecutor doing these cases is people will say, you know, the worst thing I think that could happen is they'd have to sit in a cell and. And think about what they did for the rest of their life as opposed to the death penalty. They'd have to think about it. And I really don't think these guys do that. I. I think if they thought like the rest of us, they wouldn't have gone in in the first place and. And murdered their victims or sexually abused and then murdered their victims. And they don't think like the rest of us. And I think that it's a very common. It comes from a good place. But people put themselves in that position because if you had a sense of guilt, that's what you or I would do if we killed somebody. I would beat myself up every single day if I was in a prison cell. And it's all I would think about. But they have this distinct lack of empathy. It's one of the psychological traits that has been recognized forever, and it's one of the unique characteristics of these guys. It's very interesting.

[Ashley Banfield]

I mean, that's very upsetting to think. However, I keep coming back to it sucks to be in a cell. It sucks to be 30 years old facing at least 60 years. I think if he lives to 90, facing 60 years of the same monotony every single day, you never wear civilian clothes again. I think that in itself is the worst punishment you can set aside, and you have to live with what you did. I don't think Chris Watts lives with what he did every day. I don't think Bryan Kohlberger will. But they will be horrendously mentally traumatized every day when they open their eyes and see where they are.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I don't. I've never been to a prison in Idaho, but I've been to every. Every state prison in the state of California. As part of my job, we would go and we would do what are called lifer hearings. And a lot of these guys, I hate to say it, but they adjust. They make their friends, they program, they can take classes. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he actually gets his PhD while he's in. Well, he's programmed. They call it programming. That's going to classes, going to group. He'll get his routine down. He'll have his favorites. He'll have money on his books from his parents. And a lot of them really do. They adjust. Now, again, that's one of those things for you or me, when we have a life and we've got dynamic friends and people we love, it would be the worst thing ever, Right? But for somebody like Bryan Coburger. These guys really do tend to adjust, and going to prison was part of the calculated risk. When he went into that house, you know, he thought about it.

[Ashley Banfield]

I'll bet he thought for sure he wouldn't get caught. He thinks he's that smart. But I will ask this. Would that dynamic be any different were he on death row? I mean, I know the sound death row is, like, ominous, but would he have just adjusted to that, too? And let's be frank. We all know you're on death row for a good 20 years. And maybe after 20 years, we'll have all decided death row isn't appropriate for Americans anymore. Would he have adjusted to that? Would it have been any worse?

[Matt Murphy]

Well, death row inmates are. They have different confinement circumstances. Number one, they are. They, you know, in San Quentin, each one gets their own cell, and they're. They're able to have tv and they get. They get segregated by different yards. Now, in California, we have over 700 people on death row, and we're realistically probably never going to see another execution in the state of California. Idaho has less than 10. So the difference there is that the one person that every psychopath actually cares about are themselves. And the prospect of looming execution, being a condemned prisoner, I think that it weighs far more heavily on them than. Than just accepting that, hey, I'm here. I got life sentences, and I'm. And I'm here for life. I'm going to adjust my new circumstances and take my. My, my classes and, you know, work in the shop and whatever. Whatever they have him doing. So I think it is a little. You're right, they. They do adjust to death row. But I really do think that it. It's something that spectre hanging over their head does have a psychological impact, especially in a state like Idaho where. Where he faces the very real prospect of actually being executed. Now, they, you know, the, The. The good thing about what the DA did here, and I, and I'm not 100% on board with this decision at all, but the good thing is there really is an exhaustive appellate process on death penalty cases. And my riding alcohol case, you know, I tried. I had. I tried the third trial on that case, so that family had to go through it three separate times, and it just.

[Ashley Banfield]

Dating Game Killer for those who don't.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah, the Dating Game Killer. That's right. He had two convictions and two death sentences reversed by the appellate courts in California. And I'm not taking issue with the reasons why they did it, but these cases do get the highest level of appellate scrutiny, as they should, because you're talking about the ultimate penalty. But it is, and it can be brutal for the families. That is all true. On the other hand, there are, and look, I'm not hardcore either way on the death penalty. And I've personally tried eight of them. There are really good reasons against the death penalty that are philosophical and religious, but there are also very good reasons, I believe, for the death penalty. And when we get outside the politics of our time and the screaming heads and all that, when you have a rational discussion in the middle, and I used to do this at law schools, it can be very interesting. Like when you talk about what is the value of justice, what is the value of the victim's lives, do we express that? You know, should the state be involved in executing anybody? You know, given all of our experiences, the dmv. Right. Like, you know, all of those are.

[Ashley Banfield]

Really, to say the least, that last point. Right, to say the least. We are so imperfect, even the best of us are so imperfect. And you don't get a mulligan when you impose.

[Matt Murphy]

No, you don't get them all. Again. That's right. But I can tell you this. I sat on the death penalty review committee in Orange County. We call it our specialist search committee. And I did it for 15 years. And of the murder cases that were eligible for the death, we call them special circumstance cases. Those are murders committed in the course of a robbery, during a rape, gang crimes, drug dealers shooting each other, like all these different things that qualify. We sought death in less than 4% over that 15 year period of time. So the cases that the essentially the two requirements, and it wasn't a formalized thing, we would recommend to the elected da. And sometimes he followed our recommendations, sometimes he did not. But you. The two fundamental requirements is there has to be zero doubt about guilt. Zero doubt. Like and not like the legal definition. Like you must have zero doubt that the guy did it. And the murder has to be shocking. So it has to be like a murder of a child, like my Samantha running case, or a serial killer like Rodney Alcala or heinous, atrocious, all of the above. It has to be. Exactly. It has to be. It can't be a robbery gone wrong or gang members killing each other. It's not that kind of murder. It's shocking and brutal where justice essentially demands the ultimate penalty, at least on paper, whether it's ever carried out or not, as a separate issue. And for some family members especially, I'm thinking of the Gonzalez family here. That can be a very cathartic thing to have the jury, as the voice of the community, come in and say, Mr. Kohberger, we are so convinced of your guilt and you offer so little in the way of mitigating evidence. And these kids were so valuable as human beings and they're beautiful and they're on the cusp of their lives that whether you're ever executed or not, you deserve to die for what you did. There can be solace for certain family members, other family members. Sometimes they may be opposed to the death penalty religiously, philosophically, politically, and that might be really hard for them. You factor all of those things in when you make the determination at the beginning. And this DA went through that process. And one of the things I'm really looking forward to and I hope we get the answer to, is what changed? Because I haven't heard anything yet, because he made that decision. That's a very somber, serious. It's the most. It's the heaviest decision that an elected district attorney will ever be called to make.

[Ashley Banfield]

I was going to ask you about that because this looked like a slam dunk. Right, right. But I do want to ask you, here's what I think might have changed. Maybe, just maybe, we're dealing with four sets of parents, two surviving roommates, who I believe should have been part of that mix as well, because this is their lives as well. Right. This is the trial. They had to stand up and sit on a witness stand in front of millions of people. Maybe the balance of numbers was off. The Gonzalez has absolutely wanted the death penalty. I'm told another family member as well did, but at least two other family members did not, and we don't know about Dylan and Bethany, whether they did not want to go through with this. Does that count? The numbers game when it comes to the victims, the surviving victims, the family members, if they're all begging the prosecutor, but for maybe one or two of them, but please don't make us go through with this. Does that count?

[Matt Murphy]

Everything counts. So when. When a DA makes that decision, it is it. They should be considering all the fors and against. And the way the law is structured on this is it's. It's a balancing and a weighting of what are called aggravating versus mitigating circumstances. So in the state of California, factors in aggravation are things like the circumstances of the offense, which include the impact on the victim's families, how much. How much they're going to missed their loved one, how valuable they were, whether there was any Other crimes of violence in the background, things atrocious and cruel.

[Ashley Banfield]

That's another one.

[Matt Murphy]

No, that. Absolutely. Those are all things that get to get factored in. And then in the way of mitigation, you consider things like, was a defendant mentally ill? Was the defendant under the influence of drugs? Was it. Was the defendant under the dominion or control of another person? Were they doing it? In other words, were they the lightweight in this and somebody else was a main actor? And then in California, as is, you know, federal, federally, there's the same thing. There's a similar provision in Idaho. In California, it's called K factor evidence, where it's essentially a catch all. It's any other piece of evidence lawfully admitted that the jury considers to be mitigating or ameliorating.

[Ashley Banfield]

Can I tell you?

[Matt Murphy]

And then their job is to assign away. And if.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, literally. And the standard is every state has that last catch all. You have the nice long list of mitigators and then you have the last. All the last one, which is anything else, folks, which could be.

[Matt Murphy]

That's right.

[Ashley Banfield]

My Cub Scout leader when I was six wants to.

[Matt Murphy]

Right. And the jury must find that these aggravating factors substantially outweigh any factors in mitigation. It can't be like 51%. The word is substantial outweigh. So must kind of overwhelm it. And there's no percentage that's assigned to that. That's the process. But that's the exact same process that the prosecutors go through behind the scenes when they evaluate death or in California, life without possibility of parole when you're weighing those two things. So this DA very properly went through that process. I thought it was the right call, given the brutality of this case. And I can tell you our committee would have seen this as a death case all day long because also Bryan Kohberger, we've heard that allegations that he's somewhere on the autism spectrum. Whether he is or isn't and whether that's a factor of mitigation, he's very high functioning. He's getting his PhD. We saw how alert he was in court when he took the plea. And look, a lot of these are it's battles of the experts and they can be tough cases. In fact, they're all tough cases. But I want to know what changed. Because the defendants all want to plead guilty. They all want to. They all want elw. That's their win. And it's known as a bifurcated trial. So first you have the guilt phase. Then the same jury hears evidence Regarding penalty. And that is, that's the process. And it's, it's heavy and, and it's, it's involved. But when you make the call, I don't know, go through it.

[Ashley Banfield]

I don't think, I don't think Bryan Kohberger thought he'd be convicted. I think he's that egotistical, the kind of guy that goes back to the scene of the crime at nine in the morning, whether it was to look for the knife sheath outside or not. I think he thinks he's that good. I think he thinks he's that much better than the rest of us, that he could carry this out for his own enjoyment or whatever the hell it was he wanted. And I think he's the kind of guy who said, I'm going to beat the rap. I don't want to plead, I gotta beat the rap. And I think maybe when the final blow was dealt to him by the judge in the last, what was it, two or three weeks before trial.

[Matt Murphy]

You.

[Ashley Banfield]

Know, Ann Taylor said, no, there really is nothing left. There really is nothing left. I can't point to other people anymore. The judge said, no, you can't have an alternate perpetrator theory, Brian. You're going down. I feel like that might have been the final decision making, but I think all along, I don't think he would have. This is me talking. I think he would have said, I'm not taking a plea deal. I'm gonna beat this.

[Matt Murphy]

Well, yeah, and you may very well be right. And that grandiosity being one of those things on the hair psychopathy checklist. There's an arrogance that goes along with a lot of these guys. And there's a myth, Ashley, that we all. I saw Silence of the Lambs. Right, your Buffalo Bill. Another big question you get as a prosecutor is what could have made him do that? What drove him to that? And we think about that character in Silence of the Lambs, the guy who's murdering women to take their skin because he wants to metamorphosize in the death's head MOT and all that stuff. And that was very loosely based on an actual guy. But that's mental illness. You know, the, the, the sad, kind of scary reality in my experience on these guys is they tend to be exactly what you're talking about. They tend to be intelligent, they tend to be super arrogant and they don't care about anybody else. There's nothing wrong with their moral compass. They know the difference between right and wrong.

[Ashley Banfield]

Right.

[Matt Murphy]

They do it because they don't care. So. But that said, with this evidence.

[Ashley Banfield]

More than that, Matt, I believe it's the ultimate in selfishness. They don't care. And their desire to be satiated for whatever whim is going on supersedes everything else. It supersedes morals, it supersedes risk. It supersedes all these other things.

[Matt Murphy]

Oh, yeah, no. And look, I'll share a story with you if I can. There is, and I'm working on book number two right now, which is focusing on serial killers that I encountered in my care. But I went from sexual assault into. Into homicide, and I. I wound up in homicide. I was looking for Buffalo Bill. Like, where's this poor tortured soul that was horribly abused as a child? And what I kept encountering in homicide were the same guys that I'd just been prosecuting in sexual assault. They were the serial and the personality is so similar. They were the break into the house and put the knife to the throat guy that, that was woman after woman after woman. And those guys had jobs and they had, they had wives and girlfriends, believe it or not. And they had families that cared about them. And like Rodney Alcala, the Dating Game Killer, he's a perfect example of that. This guy grew up, he went to a really good Catholic prep school in east la, Cantwell High School. We used to play them in sports with my high school. And he had a mother who loved him. He grew up in a clean home. He had a brother who went to West Point, went to Vietnam, came back a war hero like an officer in Vietnam. Very, very successful family. He had a MENSA level iq. And this guy had every advantage in life. Graduated from UCLA film school and probably murdered 100 people. So that. And was not abused by anybody. And since we had to try the case three times, there were three separate investigations looking for mitigation. And some of the best defense attorneys in California defended that guy and they couldn't find a thing. So there's that aspect of it. And when it comes to Brian Kohberger, you see this guy at the age of 28, he's driving across country in those videos that we have seen that were released with his dad, you know, and he had a functional relationship with parents that had a nuclear household, you know, like his parents, I believe. Right. They're still together. And he went and visited. He's driving across country with his dad. I didn't do a cross country too.

[Ashley Banfield]

His dad at 28, he also has great relationships with his professors and he was engaged. The students. The one student I interviewed did I lose you. Uh. Oh.

[Matt Murphy]

Nope. I gotcha.

[Ashley Banfield]

There you go. Okay. Yeah. The one student that I interviewed said that he was great. He was a great partner to be on a project with because he worked so diligently and so hard, and he was great at answering questions and great at communication. So he had a great, good relationship with men, not so great with women.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah, well, I mean, that's exactly what I'm talking about here. A lot of these guys are socially functional human beings, and it goes against that myth that they're all these loners driving a creepy van on a hill. Yeah. That's why they're even scarier, because they could be in line in front of us in Starbucks, and we would never know.

[Ashley Banfield]

They can be your husband. They can be your father. They can be. That's the biggest issue. Right. And I think, Matt, honestly, this is why you and I have these conversations. We all are racking our brains with how to spot the thing that doesn't belong in the flock and yet is lurking among us at all times with the same wool.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah, that's right. And that's. That's what makes these guys even scarier than. Yeah, I mean, they're. They're kind of the quintessential intraspecies predator. That's what they are. And another thing is, if you do a deep dive into the research on this and you really get into the history, there was a. I mean, they were talking about, you know, remember the. There's an ancient Procrustes, I think his name was. He was a. It was a Greek mythological figure. This is going back 3, 500 years with the ancient Greeks that were writing about the guy who would kill travelers and rob them and then cut their feet off or stretch them out to make them fit the beds. So even the ancient Greeks were aware of these gu. There's references in ancient Rome. And then if you get into the more modern era, there are specific serial killers that are noted in the literature from the 1600s. In Germany, there's a book called Psychopathia Sexualis written by a guy named Dr. Von Kraft ebbing in 18. I think it was 1886 when he published it. So he was a contemporary of Sigmund Freud. He put serial killers on a relational spectrum of paraphilias. Sexual paraphilias. He called them sadistic lust murders. You talk about a. A loaded term, right? Sadistic lust murders. And this guy. I. I thought also this is a product of modern American life. You know, I thought that this is something to do with Our modern society. Turns out his entire book, he lists a bunch of them, including Jack the Ripper that he talks about. And remember, Jack the Ripper was never caught. And I think it's, it's because of exactly what you're talking about. It's that ability to. That guy walked out into the streets of Whitechapel, London and immediately blended in. And that's why they never caught him. Because he. Precisely. Because he wasn't the creepy guy hanging out in the shadows. He put his top hat on and walked out with a cane after butchering those people and blended in instantly. That's why they're so hard to catch. That's why DNA evidence is so important. And that's why in the modern era, I think that, you know, the FBI estimates that at any given time there are between 25 and 50 active serial killers working in the United States. And today there's between 25 and 50. And they might be years between kills or they might be super prolific. And I think that we are. One of the things that we hear a lot is why were there so many of them in the 70s? And it's a really interesting question, but I, I think the answer to that is we're catching a lot more of them now after their first rodeo, so to speak. Not to, not to sound glib, but that is.

[Ashley Banfield]

I got you.

[Matt Murphy]

We're getting them, we're getting them right with that first rode. And there really is that blurred line between the serialists who sometimes will murder and I did a bunch of those versus the ones that are, that actually get off on the killing itself, but they are, it's such a fine line and it's amorphous. It's a gray area. Sometimes they will, they'll test the murder and they'll do one. But we tend to catch these guys after their first couple of rapes and they get lengthy prison sentences, but they.

[Ashley Banfield]

Don'T seem legendary because they don't become what they might have become when crime fighting wasn't quite as good.

[Matt Murphy]

That's exactly right. And also with the CODIS system that, that can't be understated. When every state finally went online, like I had a guy, Jason Balcombe, he was, he was that guy. He was a very prolific serial rapist who murdered a woman for fun in broad daylight. Pregnant, 22 year old, beautiful Mormon woman, newlywed. And, and all she wanted to do is be a mom. Murdered her next to a baby bassinet. Her husband came home and found her there, but we didn't, we were unable To. And then he moved to Michigan where he committed a series of r? Pes there was serving 50 years in Michigan for the Michigan. Finally went online, and we got a DNA hit to that murder. So that's the way a lot of those work. And he was 18 years old, actually. He was raping everybody in Santa Ana and Orange county and Costa Mesa. And then he got caught within, like, within 12 months. And he. And he raped multiple, multiple people. So that, that I think is why we're seeing less of these guys, is because we're getting them after that first couple of weeks as opposed to letting them blossom and evolve into what they want to become.

[Ashley Banfield]

Let me ask you something about Bryan Kohberger that I. Listen. There's so much that, you know, in the last two and a half years we've been compiling that I keep forgetting things, you know, and something came back to me a while ago where I thought, hold it. You know, this, this detail from back then. Does it make more sense with what we know now? When he was arrested, the minute they slapped the cuffs on him, the first thing out of his mouth was, have you arrested anyone else? And I thought, I wonder what Matt's going to think about that now, given this admission, given everything we've been through, that the first thing out of his mouth was maybe plant the seed that there's somebody else out there because he's crafted a plan for getting caught.

[Matt Murphy]

You know, he may. I mean, remember, this is a, this is a PhD student in criminology, right? So this is a guy who has thought this through. And that's something that, that very well might have been a planet thing. He very well might have wondered if there were any other suspects that they'd arrested. He might have wanted to know if he was, if where he was, if they were looking at a bunch of people and arresting him. It's really difficult to know. But I can tell you the vast majority, and certainly not all, the Hillside Strangler, Angelo Bono, he was active with his cousin doing those. And sometimes these guys will team up. I had another one in Orange county where I, I, I had the case for a very short period of time, but it was suit. Two serial killers working together, murdering sex workers. And one of them had his. Had his court monitor bracelet on, on his ankle, like his ankle monitor. And so it was the easiest case to look. And, you know, there was a he was. And they were disposing of the bodies in dumpsters. And then we got their cell phone records. So sometimes they will team up, but does not appear to be any evidence that Brian Kohberger acted with anybody else on it. So I think we should guard against speculation on that. And another thing that you pointed out, I am all for. And look, I love the true crime world. The people that I've met in it have been awesome. The people at CrimeCon, I love those crowds and the people that are educating themselves in this area. I think it's a wonderful thing because they're learning about the great work behind the scenes of the crime lab and these dedicated detectives, and there's so much to learn. Also love the attention to the legal system and the way people learn about things like bifurcated trials. All of that benefits us. However, there is a dark side, and that is some of these online sleuths. And in this case, there's a bunch of people that got together and decided that one of these professors at this school did it. And imagine you're a totally innocent person or like those four guys that the judge said, there's no evidence here. And one of one of these poor women, her ex boyfriend got the spotlight by the online sleuths.

[Ashley Banfield]

And people have, remember, let's be clear about this. There was one person in particular who went after that professor and named her as the killer. Said she was having a sexual relationship with. I think one of the girls on the third floor. I mean, just went absolutely off her rocker and was sued successfully, but continued, as I understand it, to propagate these lies against this poor professor and I think then had a following who jumped on board with. Was the example of the horrendousness of how some people treated the Idaho murders.

[Matt Murphy]

Well, I'll tell you, you know, this is more, I guess more of a personal comment between you and me, but I don't mind saying it, like, as a DA with all the death threats that you get, I had no social media for years. Absolutely no social media. And that now that I'm out and I'm in private practice and I'm doing the media stuff. I heard of online trolls before. I really did not appreciate how vicious people could be online until I sort of entered the world. It is unbelievable. I saw an interview where Joe Rogan said, never read the comments. And boy, oh, boy, was he. Was he right? And that group that you were talking about, they started calling themselves Pro Burgers. They, like, gave themselves a cute little nickname. Pro Burgers. They were. Look, he's not alleged to have committed this murder anymore. He came into court, he admitted it. The cell phone information was overwhelming. Guys, that DNA and we Heard all this stuff. Well, it's transitory and it's circumstant. So I've done. I tried 53 murders when I was in the homicide unit. I'm telling you, the evidence against Brian Kohberger was absolutely overwhelming. From the very beginning. He was going to go down regardless of what he thought. And I think all of those people that were jumping on the pro Brian Kohberger bandwagon, he admitted it because he really did it. And they got. I hope some of them think twice before they do that again.

[Ashley Banfield]

Before they do it again.

[Matt Murphy]

Innocent people can get hurt.

[Ashley Banfield]

And I'll tell you what, you and I can talk till we're blue in the face, but they will continue doing this and they will continue to believe he's innocent for whatever crazy reason. I do want to ask you this, though. Ann Taylor. Look, great lawyer, obviously really, really dogged defense attorney. She. She went to every crevice and every crack and dug out everything that she possibly could to put in the quiver of arrows, right? But at one point, I feel like I recall her saying something publicly that she believed in his innocence. I get it. You're supposed to give your client a full throated American defense. I get it. But do you think, Matt, that she really believed this guy was innocent? Given all the discoveries she went through, the 53 or 56 terabytes.

[Matt Murphy]

You know, it's a subjective thought right now I, and, and I have very little to offer in the way of criticism. And what the defense did here, because they are, they're. They're tasked from the perspective of a defense lawyer. This is the heaviest job you can be given. You've got. You're in a state with less than 10 people on death row. You've got a guy that slaughtered four kids, and you are. Your task under the American system of justice is to save his life.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yes.

[Matt Murphy]

And that. So. And, and she, she did everything she was supposed to do. Now, there's not only the moral component of that and the ethical, professional component of that, but there is in the appellate process. This is what happens in every appeal. Ashley. There are three areas of attack for the appellate lawyers, which are a different set of attorneys than the trial lawyers. They attack the judge for their rulings and for their jury instructions. Almost 100% of the time, they will attack the prosecutor for what's called prosecutorial misconduct. And it gets a little worse every year. It gets a little more venomous every year. I hate that aspect of it. And I think that we're due for a correction. On that because they don't pay prosecutors enough to risk their bar card every, every time they go to court. And that's a separate thing. But they always, without fail, will accuse the defense of what's known as IAC or ineffective assistance of counsel. And they will Monday morning quarterback them to death. Okay. And they will Monday morning quarterback that defense team to death. So that's one of the reasons why they have to so thorough and they have, they have to bring all these motions.

[Ashley Banfield]

You said they Monday morning, the. Monday morning quarterback the defense team to death. I thought you're saying that they, they.

[Matt Murphy]

No, they attacked the judge, they attacked the prosecutor. But they Monday morning quarterback the defense team to death. They criticize every decision they made. They, like I can tell you right now, one of the main issues on appeal would be their stipulation to tear down the house. That was, that was a guaranteed huge issue. They were going to say that's incompetent. And so it's brutal for anybody. That. And, and for those that are really zealously opposed to the death penalty, more power to you. I have nothing but respect. But where that manifests in the appellate process is sometimes you get these lawyers who believe that it is, it's a barbaric punishment. Therefore any accusation they make against the judge, the prosecutor, or the defense team is therefore morally justified. I disagree with that. I think that it's awful. And, and I, look, I've tried, like I said, I've done eight of them against really, really good defense lawyers. Now, one of those is Rodney Alcala who represented himself. I'll take him out of the mix. But his attorney was a guy named George Peters, who's fantastic and a real dedicated, hard working, brilliant lawyer. And you know, you go through this, these trials are like wars. And you really get, it's like going, it's like going 12 rounds with a boxer. You really get a healthy respect for almost everyone, Almost everyone. But they, you know, these defense lawyers really, they work very hard at this. And look, regardless of how you feel about the case or our system of justice, that is a noble thing to do because they're trying to save somebody's life. So it is.

[Ashley Banfield]

And also not to save someone's life. They're standing up for American democracy. They're standing up for our system, which is the shining example for the world. They're standing up for your right, my rights to not be falsely accused without the most robust fight that Americans can give you. And I look, and I love that, I love that because I've Always felt not one person should be put to death who's innocent, you know, and if it takes fighting like hell for every single one of them out there, that's foul and vile and vicious, that's worth it.

[Matt Murphy]

Yep. I totally agree. There's a great HBO documentary where John Adams, Paul Giamatti plays him. It's for anybody. It is fantastic. And he gets up and at the very birth of America, you know, I feel like I should be waving the flag right now, but this is true, guys. I believe this. He gets up and he defends a bunch of British soldiers who fired into a crowd of essentially a budding riot. And they were a bunch of kids. They were completely surrounded and they fired and they killed some Americans. And he got up and he defended them. He's one of the. One of the founding fathers.

[Ashley Banfield]

Mostly successfully, I'll add.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah, he did. He was one of the prouder moments of American history. History. Because for that very reason. Exactly. We were talking about, we all deserve a defense if we're accused of something. And look, if we're actually going to carry out the ultimate penalty, which is the death penalty, it should go through that process. They should be given all of those advantages. They should have the catch all provision. They should have a judge allowing most defenses, not accusing innocent people without evidence. You know, I, I think this judge did a very, very good job. So I have very little criticism for the defense here. I have very little. I have no criticism for the court. I do take issue with some of the things that the DA did in this. As, as I've said, I think that I would love to hear what changed behind the scenes. I would love to hear what, what the change of circumstances was. And, and some of the language that he used in that plea. I did, I did not like. I didn't like how he said. I didn't like his use of the word when he was talking about sexual assault. That I didn't like the language he used in there because I thought it was very ambiguous.

[Ashley Banfield]

Components.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah, the component. I didn't like that word because that seems to imply motive. And I'd like to think he wasn't saying that. I'd like to think that he was referring to evidence at the scene that there's no sexual assault, but he didn't say that. He said there's no component, and then he said there was no sexual assault. And component to me means no porn searches, no evidence at all. I mean, another rumor he heard is that Coburger was obsessed with Ted Bundy. I don't know if that's true abuse. If it is true, though. Ted Bundy viciously, brutally, sexually, sexually, every one of his victims. As again, the FBI did a study on this where a healthy majority of serial killers sexually violated their victims. And, and they're. This is a recognized thing that many of them that don't that simply kill, even then they're motivated by sexual components. So I again, maybe he knows something that we don't. He knows a lot that I don't because I haven't seen the reports. But I hope that that was just a poor choice of words and he was describing the scene. Otherwise I take issue with that.

[Ashley Banfield]

I have one other question for you that I think you specifically, with your background could at least lend some guidance or expertise or at least a hypothesis on. When we read the probable cause affidavit long ago, the one bizarre piece of evidence that they listed was I think it was like a latent shoe print of blood, tiny, outside of Dylan Mortensen's room. And now given what we know, right, the killer, Bryan Coburger, came in through the back. He went upstairs, he killed the first two victims, Maddie and Kaylee, upstairs, then came down and encountered Zanna somewhere between that staircase and obviously her room where she was killed. I don't understand how there could be just one very small tiny shoe print of blood and not a river of evidence all the way from the third floor, down the second floor, around the corner to Zanna and Ethan where they were sleeping, and then back out again past Dylan's room a second time and out the kitchen door. Do you think they just left all that out and they only gave us one tiny piece of evidence in the probable cause affidavit to satisfy what they needed. Or does it mean it was almost bloodless everywhere but those two bedrooms?

[Matt Murphy]

Well, I think that. Look, it's a great observation because I've been to stabbing murder scenes with multiple victims before and it looks like Helter Skelter. The cause of death is known as exsanguination, which means you bleed to death. And when you're talking about a Marine Corps KA bar knife, that is a vicious stabbing instrument. And you're right, the vast majority of time, especially in a struggle, the killer will step in blood. However, it could be that they left that out of the warrant. Shoe print impressions are. It's a fascinating subset of forensic science that I had a case with a guy once who to murder two victims with a knife inside. It was his ex boyfriend and an ex boyfriend's lover. The Dependent's name was Vincent Wei Choi Chung. And he was wearing socks when he snuck into the house. And so we had footprints all over, but they were socked footprints. So we had no ridged detail like fingerprints. And we brought down actually a Mountie from Canada as our expert who testified about it. And it is fascinating. So in this case, again, we just don't know until we see the photos and look for these crime scene photos. I hope for the sake of these families, we never do. I hope that those are never unsealed.

[Ashley Banfield]

Have you ever seen a crime scene, let's just say multiple stabbings, where there isn't helter skelter, where there isn't blood everywhere. There is only blood where those victims were attacked. Cause that's the image I have in my head.

[Matt Murphy]

I have. I had a stabbing at a New Year's Eve party where there was very, very little blood on the outside. However, during the autopsy, as soon as they opened my poor victim's chest, all the blood was contained inside his. Inside his. His body cavity, basically. And that's where he bled into. So it can happen. I don't think that happened here. I think these. I think that this was. There's blood everywhere. Somehow, based on that one line, and I read that just like you did not, it appears that he didn't step in the blood. Now, we don't know for sure again, but sometimes that happens. Sometimes you're going to get that if you step in the blood. These kids are on the bed. Maybe his shoes never came in contact with it because of the positions they were in. If they were. Were lying down. It's really, really hard to say.

[Ashley Banfield]

Hunter Johnson was interviewed in an Amazon special that just released. And now it's very clear that Hunter witnessed the horrors of whatever it was on the second floor. I don't know how close he got to seeing Zanna and Ethan and he didn't tell the documentarians what he saw. But Matt, he had to have told the police everything. He had to have given them that account. And it has to be in the file. Hopefully that, you know, may end up, you know, being. Being ungagged. I'm just wondering how much we will learn about what Hunter really saw.

[Matt Murphy]

If that's one of the items that will. That's going to be released, I guarantee there's going to be an entire taped interview. I mean that. That exists. I'm certain this is. These cops did a good job, Ashley. Based on everything that I've seen, which means that was recorded. There's pro. Probably A videotape of that. There were probably multiple statements at the scene. I'm sure they interviewed him in a more formal setting with. With, you know, video hd, hopefully, and. And everything that they. That they could to preserve this evidence and that, you know, again, these poor kids, the kids I. My heart just breaks for these families, for all the families and the kids that survived it, too. They will never be the same. And remember we were talking about trolling a minute ago that. That poor girl. I shouldn't call her a girl. She's a young woman. That poor young woman that described the bushy eyebrows. You know, these are kids. They're out. You know, they'd all been drinking like a lot of us did in college. And, you know, the last thing she is thinking is that there's, you know, some slaughter because some psycho has gone in and killed everybody upstairs. And she. She was criticized very harshly online for a while. And I brutally. I hope. I hope people think better of that. I have felt sorry for that kid since the very beginning of this. And again, I really hope people online. And you're right, they probably won't. But I hope some people think twice and just show a little more empathy for that. That is a kid in the worst circumstance who lost a bunch of her friends and by the way, very lucky she didn't get killed, too.

[Ashley Banfield]

Right. And she probably lives with survivor's guilt every day, as does Bethany, who was sleeping downstairs. But the cruelty that the Internet leveled upon this poor young woman. And I say kid, too, because I've got kids this age, and they're kids, you know, they're just kids, and they're coming into their adulthood. And you're right, the last thing on your mind would be that there's a maniacal killer tearing apart your friends. You know, that's Truman Capote stuff. Maybe the worst thing she was thinking was that the doordash driver was creepy and made his way inside and wanted to pick up something and leave. That would be what's on your mind, and that would be enough to scare the bejesus out of you. So, yeah, the lack of empathy from the Internet on these kids, I will never get over that. And I won't get over it with Chris Watts's family, you know, Chris Watts's victim's family, Shanann Watts family. They were. They're continuing to be assailed almost a decade later. I don't get it. I never will get it. But I hope you're right. I hope that they see this and maybe at some point start to Feel a little compunction about what they've done and what they've continued to. To do.

[Matt Murphy]

Yep. Yeah. And also, look, the pro burger crowd. Imagine if you're a family member. And by the way, guys, you're wrong. Came from a good place. But everybody wants to be smart and everybody wants to figure it out. And it's like, you know, we see that from time to time where everybody jumps on a bandwagon. And if you are the victim's family in that, that is brutal for them. And you know, I mean, I'm scolding the ether right now, but I just, I worked with families on every one of my cases for 17 years. They all got my personal cell phone number and that was a huge part of my job. The victim witness people are heroes behind the scenes. And I just. You don't know what these people go through until God forbid you go through it yourself. And the idea that you got people for fun and entertainment rallying behind an accused person is brutal when it comes.

[Ashley Banfield]

To homicide or, or a self admitted one because you know, he's still going to get love letters.

[Matt Murphy]

Oh, okay. And he. It ain't alleged anymore, folks. He's guilty. He admitted it. Wouldn't have done it if he was innocent. He actually did it. We heard him say it in court. Evidence was overwhelming in the first place. And now we'll move on to the victim impact statements that I think will be soul crushing for these family members. But I. Hopefully there'll be some measure of catharsis. I don't think we're ever going to see the answers that we want. Like what was the actual motivation? What was the order? I don't know if Toberger will ever reveal that. And they didn't do it in what's called the factual basis for the plea. It's very legalese. It's just the bare bones. I, you know, that's another criticism. Sorry. That I got of the DA here. I think that he should have gotten more detail out of Brian Kohberger in exchange for that plea to at least give the family some answers.

[Ashley Banfield]

Well, he did say, you know, Bill Thompson did say that he would sit down with the families after the sentencing and fill them in on. On other things that they had. I don't know if that meant. I'll go over the gag order with you first before I lift it. I don't know what he meant by that, but I did want to ask you what you think the prosecution also signed away. For instance, we heard rumors that Bryan Coburger's family is going to give a big interview and that Bryan himself will give an interview. The family will benefit. They'll be given money. But is there anything that you can do to silence an inmate behind bars and say, nope, you'll never do an interview. You'll never get your say out there. You won't be able to survive an infamy. Is there something they can write, or is that just un American?

[Matt Murphy]

No, there is. It's called the Son of Sam laws, which passed after the famous serial killer David Berkowitz in New York in the late 70s. Son of Sam and a bunch of states adopted some version of this where people that are convicted of violent felonies are prohibited from benefiting from their crimes by writing books, by giving interviews.

[Ashley Banfield]

Yeah, that part I get, and that's been around for a long time. But they still benefit because they get out there and they get their message out and they get their face out there and they feel like they're the subject of books and movies and conversations like we're having.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah, look, we just saw this with the Menendez brothers, you know, and I've got some strong opinions on that case that are somewhat controversial among some. I don't care.

[Ashley Banfield]

You've told me those opinions before. It's another podcast.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah, another podcast. A lot of whether or not interviews can be conducted of inmates depends on the Department of Corrections in whatever state. It varies by state, state by state. And then while they're in the jail, it varies by. By county. Some will allow it, some won't. Some get to do interviews, some don't. So it'd be interesting to see what happens here. I personally don't want to hear from Brian Kohberger myself at sentencing. He may be given an opportunity to do what's called a statement and allocution. That's never satisfying for the families. We might want him to apologize.

[Ashley Banfield]

You know, I feel the same way you do. I feel like I never want to hear from him again. I want him to go into a cell and just atrophy mentally and physically. However, the other side of me, who has worked in this business for probably as long as you have, because as I found out today, you're exactly my same age. I want to know more so that the rest of us can maybe, as we go through our evolution, spot these wolves in sheep's clothing, find the red flags. Do you know what I mean? Like, it's like. It's a love hate relationship I have with knowing more about. About people like Brad Piper.

[Matt Murphy]

I totally get that. I mean, and look, it's fascinating. I think that some of it actually really is. It's a primal instinct that we all have. We want to do exactly what you just said. It's a survival thing. We want to be able to spot the predator in the crowd. I would love to, to crack the code of these guys. My second book is going to be descending into that, like trying to figure it out as best I can, but it is, they are, are charming a lot of times. They are superficially engaging. They, you know, they're. Watch the Ted Bundy tapes and I mean, that guy was a monster and yet nobody knew it and, and that's, that's the challenge. I hope we get there. And I'm with you. I wish, I wish we could figure that out. I wish there was some like, stamp we could put on these guys or maybe they were born with some sort of birthmark, but they're just not, you know, and they, that's why Jack the Ripper was never found. That's why Rex Hurman, allegedly, you know, he's been accused. But that guy was an architect with a family, you know, a BTK killer family. Rodney Okala had girlfriends. Joseph d', Angelo, Golden State Killer, had a family and kids. They're really. I'm with you there.

[Ashley Banfield]

Joseph d' Angelo was a cop, you know.

[Matt Murphy]

Yeah, that's right.

[Ashley Banfield]

How the hell are you ever supposed to, to spot them if there's one amongst us as a cop? Okay, so I have one last question for you, and I don't know if it's a question or just an observation, but I have, I've witnessed a lot of victims impact statements and they are gut wrenching, as you said. I don't know how many convicted murderers are affected in any way by the victim's family members pain and grief in court. I almost wonder if it's more effective to have a statement read by someone else, meaning family members don't even show up. And a statement is almost one line that says, I actually don't care about you and that's it. Like that to me would hurt Bryan Coburger more than anything. I don't care about you.

[Matt Murphy]

I think you're right in the sense that the best thing or the worst thing for him, the best thing for everybody else, would be if he's forgotten about. But I don't think he ever will be. And I think that the, the real value of that when the family comes in is they're able to say it. The defendant is compelled to sit there and he's got to listen. And whether he cares or not, they at least get to express it. I, I think that the DA look, and I don't, I don't know what happened behind the scenes here. If what the Gonzalez family said, that they were notified via email 48 hours before that plea. I'll tell you right now, and I don't know if that's true, that should never, ever happen in California and a lot of other states that have adopted what's called Marcy's Law. That would be a violation of their rights. So I, and I don't know, I don't know what happened. But if they've said words to that effect and to that extent, I think that for the Gonzalez family, especially that poor dad, you know, I think that he may get as much out of making the, making his statement with the D A having to listen as Coburger sitting there, too, because I think they, they, they, they've publicly said they feel betrayed. I believe that was the word they used. And it's, and look, that's a, this DA has a really rough job. And I want to be fair. The elected DA Making these decisions is an incredibly tough job. And trying to balance justice with the victims with withering, you know, attention in the media, it's really, really tough. And I have, I believe he believes he did the right thing. He's to going got people from the, from the bleachers like me that are criticizing some of the things he does. And I, I, I don't want to be unfair. On the other hand, that's why they pay you the big bucks, buddy. And that's why that's a part of the job. And dealing with difficult family members is a part of the job. And my heart goes out to the, to the victim's families above and beyond anybody else.

[Ashley Banfield]

Matt Murphy, I could talk to you for days and days, which is why I'm going to call you again. Thank you so much for.

[Matt Murphy]

All right, happy to come on anytime. Ashley. I love your show.

[Ashley Banfield]

My great thanks to Matt Murphy. I love having conversations with him. I do so on my Banfield show, on News Nation and at CrimeCon. Every chance I get, I try to pick Matt Murphy's brain. And I'll tell you what, I had, like, so many other questions for him, but the conversation was longer than I expected. And I really mean it when I'm gonna call him back and maybe when the sentencing happens and we do find out what we're going to learn, I will have Matt back. And we can, we can parse what we didn't know, what we do know and whether it's at all satis honestly, the public deserves to know. We really do. It's our process. It's our democracy. This is our government. This is our judicial process. These are our fellow citizens. These are our fellow Americans. These are people who walk among us. These are our neighbors. And we deserve to know when and how we can be the most safe with our families, our friends and our loved ones.

[Matt Murphy]

Ones.

[Ashley Banfield]

And all that comes from information. It really does. And so much more. Anyway, thank you so much for being a part of this community. I can't tell you how much I appreciate that you're here all the time. If you're watching, thank you for watching. If you're listening, thank you for listening. And remember, I always say it, the truth isn't just serious, it's drop dead serious.