Podcast Summary: Murder Sheet
Episode: The University of Idaho Murders: Amazon Orders and Eyebrows
Release Date: March 25, 2025

Overview

In this episode of Murder Sheet, hosts Áine Cain and Kevin Greenlee delve into the latest developments in the University of Idaho murder case involving Bryan Kohberger. The discussion centers around recent legal filings, the significance of eyewitness testimonies, the introduction of circumstantial evidence related to Amazon purchases, and debates surrounding neuropsychological evaluations. The hosts provide insightful legal analysis, address public opinions, and explore the implications of various pieces of evidence presented in the case.

1. Recent Legal Filings and Eyewitness Testimony

Kevin Greenlee begins by addressing a surge in legal filings related to the case. He notes the complexity and volume of these filings, indicating that a single episode may not suffice to cover all aspects comprehensively. The primary focus is on the pivotal eyewitness testimony from a young woman who encountered the killer.

Kevin Greenlee [02:15]: "We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews, and deep dives into murder cases."

The eyewitness described the killer with bushy eyebrows, a detail that has become a focal point in legal arguments.

a. The Manson Biggers Test Debate

The defense has raised objections to the admissibility of the eyewitness's testimony, invoking the Manson Biggers test, a legal standard used to assess the reliability of eyewitness identifications, especially when police procedures may be suggestive.

Kevin Greenlee [04:48]: "The Manson Biggers test is something that arose out of a couple of United States Supreme Court decisions where the issue was... determining whether the value of the testimony is such that it should be admitted despite questionable police methods."

However, the prosecution argues that the Manson Biggers test is not applicable in this scenario because the police did not attempt to steer the witness toward identifying a specific suspect. The witness provided her descriptions independently, both before and after Bryan Kohberger was identified as a suspect.

Áine Cain [06:04]: "My name is Anya Cain. I'm a journalist."

Kevin Greenlee [06:32]: "The police were just asking what did you see? They weren't trying to steer her towards anyone at all."

Áine Cain emphasizes the consistency and reliability of the witness's testimony despite her admission of being intoxicated at the time of the encounter.

Áine Cain [09:49]: "These are very young people... different circumstances, different ages, different levels of experience."

2. The Significance of Bryan Kohberger’s Eyebrows

A notable piece of evidence is a photograph (selfie) of Bryan Kohberger taken hours after the murders, which the prosecution intends to use to present a visual match to the eyewitness's description emphasizing his bushy eyebrows.

Kevin Greenlee [15:14]: "The state intends to introduce a photograph of Bryan Kohberger taken from his phone on November 13, 2022... does he have bushy eyebrows in this picture or does he not?"

Áine Cain discusses the media's fascination with visual evidence and public reactions to the selfie.

Áine Cain [20:12]: "I'm part of the crazy eyebrows community. But I'd say he does have big, bushy eyebrows. So, I mean, it's certainly in this image."

The hosts debate the relevance of this evidence, acknowledging that while eyebrows alone are not conclusive, they contribute to a cumulative body of circumstantial evidence.

Kevin Greenlee [27:25]: "Criminal cases, it's like an accumulation of small details and eventually they stack up."

3. Amazon Click Activity as Circumstantial Evidence

The prosecution has introduced evidence of Bryan Kohberger’s Amazon purchase history, highlighting his acquisition of a K-Bar knife and sheath prior to the murders and subsequent searches for similar items post-crime.

Kevin Greenlee [31:26]: "Kohberger's click activity indicates a purchase of a K-Bar knife and sheath before the homicides, making it more probable that the K-Bar sheath found at the scene belonged to him."

Áine Cain criticizes the defense's attempt to dilute this evidence by arguing that all Amazon activity should be disclosed, deeming it irrelevant.

Áine Cain [29:58]: "That's not, we don't need to know about the textbooks he purchased months earlier or whatever... that's not relevant."

The hosts agree that the focus should remain on relevant evidence directly connected to the crime.

4. Neuropsychological and Psychiatric Evidence

A significant portion of the episode is dedicated to discussing the defense’s motion to introduce Bryan Kohberger’s diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) into the trial.

a. Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)

Kevin Greenlee explains that under Idaho law, mental health evidence is only admissible if directly relevant to the crime.

Kevin Greenlee [35:12]: "If a person has a mental disorder or a mental condition that in no way impacts the crime with which they are charged with, then why even talk about it in court?"

Áine Cain expresses her perspective on the potential fairness such evidence could introduce, advocating for jurors to understand neurodiverse behaviors without bias.

Áine Cain [39:21]: "Having an expert come in and say, let's set that aside would be helpful and would be fair to people in this situation."

However, Kevin Greenlee counters by asserting that introducing such evidence without direct relevance could lead to prejudice.

Kevin Greenlee [39:01]: "If something is not relevant, there's really no reason to present it in front of the jury."

b. Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) and Developmental Coordination Disorder

The defense argues that Kohberger’s OCD explains behaviors like wearing gloves, which the prosecution interprets as attempts to hide DNA evidence.

Áine Cain [43:35]: "He actually normally does that because of his OCD diagnosis. That influences his behavior around being concerned about germs."

Kevin Greenlee concurs on the relevance, highlighting how such testimony can clarify actions that might otherwise be misinterpreted.

Kevin Greenlee [44:53]: "If you're seeing that, because of his OCD, then I can sort of set that aside."

c. State’s Response to Defense’s Motion

The prosecution responds by clarifying that they do not intend to use ASD as an aggravating factor but reserve the right to challenge it if the defense introduces it as a mitigating factor.

Kevin Greenlee [50:03]: "The state has no plans to rely on defendant's autism as an aggravating factor... but we want to have the right to challenge it."

They further argue that ASD should not be a blanket category applied uniformly due to its spectrum nature.

Kevin Greenlee [55:05]: "Autism spectrum disorder is not susceptible to defendant's categorical approach."

5. Courtroom Decorum and Family Members' Conduct

Another critical issue discussed is a motion by the defense to regulate the behavior of family members and spectators in the courtroom to prevent potential jury coercion.

Kevin Greenlee [56:11]: "Mr. Kohberger respectfully requests that the court's guidance outline proper courtroom decorum... since such conduct poses a coercive threat to the jury's ability to remain impartial."

Áine Cain empathizes with the victims' families but supports the defense's stance for maintaining impartiality.

Áine Cain [57:55]: "Their anger is completely valid, their rage is valid... but that just does not seem the place for it."

The hosts agree that while the emotions of the families are understandable, the courtroom should remain a neutral ground to ensure a fair trial.

Kevin Greenlee [59:55]: "I think that's absolutely correct to ask for this for their client. I think the court would be correct to not allow it."

6. Concluding Remarks

As the episode wraps up, Áine Cain and Kevin Greenlee reflect on the complexity of the case and the multifaceted legal strategies employed by both the prosecution and defense. They express anticipation for future developments and potential additional episodes to cover ongoing filings.

Áine Cain [61:27]: "It's one of those cases that certainly has attracted a level of kind of nutty opinions online to a certain extent. But from the perspective of what the parties are doing, a lot of it makes sense."

They also touch upon the broader societal implications, such as public reactions and media portrayals, advocating for empathy and factual considerations over sensationalism.

Notable Quotes

• Kevin Greenlee [04:48]: "What kind of test should we use to apply whether or not the value of the testimony is such that it should be admitted despite whatever the police might have done that is questionable?"

• Áine Cain [09:16]: "These are very young people... different circumstances, different ages, different levels of experience."

• Kevin Greenlee [16:26]: "Does he have bushy eyebrows in this picture or does he not?"

• Áine Cain [43:35]: "He actually normally does that because of his OCD diagnosis. That influences his behavior around being concerned about germs."

• Kevin Greenlee [55:05]: "Autism spectrum disorder is not susceptible to defendant's categorical approach."

Conclusion

This episode of Murder Sheet provides a thorough exploration of recent legal arguments and evidence in the Bryan Kohberger case. Through detailed analysis and balanced discussion, Áine Cain and Kevin Greenlee offer listeners a comprehensive understanding of the intricacies involved in high-profile true crime investigations. The hosts emphasize the importance of evidence-based conclusions and advocate for fairness and empathy within the judicial process.

Note: Timestamps referenced in notable quotes correspond to the transcript provided and help contextualize the discussion points within the episode.