The Murder Sheet: "The University of Idaho Murders: Money"

Podcast: Murder Sheet
Episode Date: November 11, 2025
Hosts: Áine Cain (A) and Kevin Greenlee (B)

Episode Overview

This episode delves into the financial and legal aftermath of the University of Idaho murders, specifically focusing on recent restitution hearings. Áine Cain and Kevin Greenlee break down how funeral expenses, crime victim compensation, and legal debates regarding "Son of Sam" laws are playing out in the wake of the perpetrator's guilty plea. The hosts provide a detailed, accessible discussion of complex legal issues, victim compensation, and the challenges of preventing murderers from profiting from their crimes.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Restitution & the Plea Agreement

• Context (03:00–06:39):

  • The murderer pled guilty to four counts of first-degree murder and burglary, receiving consecutive life sentences with no chance to appeal.
  • The plea agreement stipulates the state may seek restitution for funeral expenses and crime victim compensation, with amounts to be determined.

• Recent Issues:

  • There was a hearing on November 5, 2025, before Judge Steven Hippler, concerning whether funeral-related urn expenses should be added to the killer's restitution.
  • Additional requests included lodging and travel for victims’ families, but the prosecutor quickly retracted these after realizing the law didn't allow them (08:33).

  Quote:
  “So part of that plea agreement that was less… talked about involved money, involved compensation. And so today we are going to talk about it and get into that because there have been some recent developments in the case over the topic of money, or as it's called in this situation, restitution.”
  — Áine Cain (04:02)

2. Arguments: Ability to Pay & Family Support

• Defense's Position:

  • The killer's attorney argued he lacked funds to pay for the urns, emphasizing his incarceration and lack of earning ability (06:49).
  • Most previous funds in the inmate account came from family, not fans or outside sources (30:13).

• Prosecution & Judge's View:

  • The prosecution and judge noted that the past is the best predictor of future behavior—since the family sent him money in the past, it's reasonable to expect this could continue.
  • Judge Hippler displayed little patience for arguments trying to limit or review these restitution payments, pointing out the killer agreed to pay them.

  Quote:
  "One of the best indications of the future is the past. In the past, this perpetrator's family put thousands of dollars on his books… what's the point of a plea agreement on restitution if the defense is able to argue against the restitution called for in the plea agreement?"
  — Áine Cain reporting Judge Hippler's comments (30:13–32:23)

3. Son of Sam Laws: Can Killers Profit from Their Crimes?

• Explanation (10:43–14:13):

  • "Son of Sam" laws prevent criminals from profiting off their crimes (e.g., publishing books, movies).
  • The hosts highlight constitutional challenges—specifically First Amendment concerns.
  • Noted that such laws must be carefully crafted to avoid limiting the rights of people writing memoirs that include criminal activity (e.g., Malcolm X, St. Augustine).

  Quote:
  “But we have a First Amendment in this country, don't we?... That butts up against your First Amendment, your constitutional rights which don't necessarily completely disappear, even if you are incarcerated.”
  — Kevin Greenlee (12:44)

• Real-World Complications:

  • Even well-intentioned laws have loopholes—what if a family member profits and then gives money to the killer? (24:20)
  • Recent Supreme Court rulings have struck down overly broad Son of Sam laws; new versions often trigger civil suits when compensation exceeds a certain amount.

4. Ethics, Victim Compensation, and the Media

• Hosts' Viewpoints:

  • The hosts express empathy for victims' families and support measures that help them recover losses, provided legal constraints are respected.
  • They caution about audience complicity in exploitative media—if viewers boycott sensationalist projects, it can inhibit such productions.

  Quote:
  “You know, if you're a serial killer, then you don't deserve to make money off of that. But… I can understand why that would be constitutionally unsound.”
  — Áine Cain (26:29)

• Media Projects & Profiting:

  • The hosts discuss hypothetical ways networks or producers might try to skirt existing laws, such as paying family members as "advisors," then funneling money to the perpetrator (35:00).
  • The solution is in public response: attention and support fuel these projects.

5. Notable Moments & Judge Hippler's Approach

• Courtroom Dynamics:

  • Judge Hippler is portrayed as no-nonsense but witty, showing irritation at defense arguments that he sees as attempts to undermine the plea agreement (29:04).
  • He makes clear that the killer’s credit or financial well-being is not his concern, especially regarding victim restitution.

  Quote:
  "We're not concerned with his credit rating at this point."
  — Judge Hippler, as recounted by Kevin (32:41)

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• On Restitution for Urns:
  "It's not speculation because we're looking. He [the killer] has received money. If more money comes in, put the urns expense at the top of the list."
  — Áine Cain paraphrasing Judge Hippler (30:13–32:23)

• On the Difficulties of Lawmaking:
  "It's hard to tailor a law so it only applies to the worst of the world… You have to be very careful about how you tailor these things."
  — Kevin Greenlee (28:46)

• On What the Public Can Do:
  "People should not support projects that do stuff like that if it bothers you… The only thing these people who do these kinds of projects are after are money, ratings. No amount of criticism is necessarily going to sway them."
  — Áine Cain (36:42)

• On Judge Hippler's Style:
  “Always nice to see Judge Hippler’s sass. I’m not gonna lie. He’s fun… He’s very no nonsense. But he has a sense of humor. He’s not just stern, he’s just like a little bit like, I don’t know what’s going on with you guys.”
  — Áine Cain (38:02)

Important Timestamps

• [03:00] – Case background and plea agreement summary
• [05:30] – Details of the recent restitution hearing
• [08:33] – Prosecutor walks back excessive restitution requests (travel/lodging)
• [10:43] – Introduction of Son of Sam laws and legal implications
• [24:20] – Discussion on legal loopholes (family members profiting)
• [29:04] – Arguments over ability to pay and judge’s reaction
• [32:41] – Judge Hippler: “We’re not concerned with his credit rating at this point.”
• [35:00] – Potential for media and families to work around Son of Sam-type restrictions
• [38:02] – Reflections on Judge Hippler's demeanor

Conclusion

This episode offers a smart, accessible breakdown of the complexities surrounding restitution, victim compensation, and the ethics of profiting from crime in high-profile murder cases. The hosts balance legal precision with empathy and call for audience responsibility regarding exploitative media. Key takeaways: restitution agreements are enforceable (regardless of prisoner's means), crafting laws that respect constitutional rights remains a challenge, and public engagement influences the true crime landscape.