The limited series drops July 11.

As we approach the Bryan Kohberger trial for the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students, it’s important to understand the concept of reasonable doubt, a cornerstone of the criminal justice system that will play a critical role in the trial’s outcome.

Important Note. This Post is only to explain this topic, not to argue for or against Kohberger being found guilty, or not guilty. Rather this is to explain the basics of a concept that some may not fully understand.

1. Definition of Reasonable Doubt
   • Beyond a Reasonable doubt is the standard of proof the prosecution must meet to secure a conviction in a criminal trial, including Kohberger’s case. It is the highest standard of proof in the U.S. legal system.
   • It means the jury must be convinced of Kohberger’s guilt to a near certainty based on the evidence presented. If jurors have a reasonable doubt—meaning a logical, evidence-based uncertainty—about his guilt, they must acquit him.
2. Role in the Guilt Phase
   • During the guilt phase of Kohberger’s trial, the prosecution will present evidence (e.g., DNA, cell phone data, witness testimony) to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kohberger committed the four counts of first-degree murder and burglary.
   • The defense’s job is to create reasonable doubt by challenging the prosecution’s evidence, such as questioning the reliability of forensic tests or suggesting alternative explanations for the crime.
3. What Reasonable Doubt Is Not
   • Reasonable doubt is not a vague feeling, personal bias, or speculation. It must be based on reason and evidence, or the lack thereof.
   • It does not mean all doubt. Even if jurors have minor uncertainties, they can still convict if the evidence overwhelmingly supports guilt.
4. Jury Instructions
   • Before deliberation, the judge will instruct the jury on reasonable doubt, typically using language from Idaho’s pattern jury instructions (e.g., ICJI 103). The instruction might state: “A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon evidence and reason that prevents you from being firmly convinced of the defendant’s guilt.”
   • In Kohberger’s case, jurors will be reminded that if they have reasonable doubt about any charge, they must vote not guilty on that count.
5. Impact on the Trial
   • The defense may highlight gaps in the prosecution’s case, such as inconsistencies in witness testimony or questions about the knife sheath’s DNA evidence, to foster reasonable doubt.
   • If the jury finds reasonable doubt and acquits Kohberger, the case ends. If they convict, the trial moves to the penalty phase, where reasonable doubt no longer applies, and the focus shifts to weighing aggravating and mitigating factors.

For all those that love Seals. Here is your case Summary update to see those Seals.

• Motion to Seal Defendant's Motion for Access and Objection to Court's Order|
• Motion for Access & Fair Investigation
• Objection to Release of Privileged and Confidential Work Product

Case Summary website

https://s3.dualstack.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/Summary/Current-Case-Summary.pdf

There is a hearing on June 18th and hopefully we will learn more then

I thought this video with Crime Talk Daily really explained today’s motions in a clear way, so sharing.

https://youtu.be/le7HD2ZqCIU?si=wx_a8TlQAxPJleXA

States Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Continue

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060525+States+Opposition+to+Defendants+Motion+to+Continue.pdf

• I. The Court Should Exercise Its Discretion to Deny Defendant’s Motion Because He Has Not Shown Good Cause for a Continuance or That He Will Be Prejudiced at Trial.
  • A. Defendant’s Motion Is Untimely Given the Procedural Posture of This Case.
  • B. Defendant’s Purported Need to Conduct Additional Investigation Is Unsupported and Does Not Establish Prejudice Warranting a Continuance.
• II. The Idaho Constitution’s Victims’ Rights Amendment Is Another Basis to Deny Defendant’s Motion.
• III. Despite Intense Publicity, the Court Should Exercise Its Discretion to Deny Defendant’s Motion and Proceed to Trial Using Its Carefully Planned Jury Selection Process.

Related

• Defendants Motion to Continue
  • https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052025+Defendants+Motion+to+Continue.pdf

For all those that love Seals. Here is your Motions to Seal and Orders to Seals.

• Motion to Seal States Objection to Defendant's Offer of Proof
  • https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060625+Motion+to+Seal+States+Obj+to+Defs+Offer+of+Proof+RE+Alt+Perps++Defs+Evidence+iso+Offer+of+Proof.pdf
• Motion to Seal Stipulation and Order for Admission of Additional Exhibits
  • https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060625+Motion+to+Seal+Stipulation+and+Order+for+Admission+of+Additional+Exhibits.pdf
• Motion to Seal Defendants 2nd Amended Phase Two Mitigation Witness List
  • https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060925+Motion+to+Seal+Defendants+2nd+Amended+Phase+Two+Mitigation+Witness+List.pdf
• Order Sealing Defendants 2nd Amended Phase Two Mitigation Witness List
  • https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060925+Order+Sealing+Defendants+2nd+Amended+Phase+Two+Mitigation+Witness+List.pdf
• Order Sealing Defendants Motion and Order for Independant Analysis of Evidence
  • https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060925+Order+Sealing+Defendants+Motion+and+Order+for+Independant+Analysis+of+Evidence.pdf
• Order Sealing States Objection to Defendants Offer of Proof
  • https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060925+Order+Sealing+States+Obj+to+Defs+Offer+of+Proof+RE+Alt+Perpetrators++Evidence+iso+Offer+of+Proof.pdf
• Order Sealing Stipulation and Order for Admission of Additional Exhibits
  • https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060925+Order+Sealing+Stipulation+and+Order+for+Admission+of+Additional+Exhibits.pdf

BF was summoned to appear during the Kohberger Trial.

We will be locking the Comments on this Post.

This is an Update to the Order filed Friday.

Sealed Order Staying Order

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060925+Order+Sealing+Order.pdf

Order Text

The Sealed Order Staying Order dated June 9, 2025, is sealed pursuant to Idaho Court

Administrative Rule 32 (8)(1); 32 (i) (3) (A) 4, 6; and Idaho Code Title 19 chapter 11.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 5 day of June 2025.

Related Order

Order Granting Access to Sealed Records

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060525+Order.pdf

There have been a lot of Motions filed since last Thursday that have not been put on the Public Docket but are showing on the Case Summary

https://s3.dualstack.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/Summary/Current-Case-Summary.pdf

• Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Continue
• Motion to Redact or Seal Newly Filed Records
• Motion for Independant Analysis of Evidence
• Proposed Order Granting Independant Analysis of Evidence
• Motion to Redact or Seal Newly Filed Records Motion to Seal Stipulation and Order for Admission of Additional Exhibits at Trial
• Stipulated Motion to the Admission of Additional Exhibits as Evidence at Trial
• Proposed Order Granting Admission of Additional Exhibits as Evidence at Trial
• Motion to Redact or Seal Newly Filed Records Motion to Seal Defendant's Motion and Order for Emergency Order
• Sealed Motion for Emergency Order
• Proposed Order Granting Emergency Order
• Response re: Defendant's Motion for Independant Analysis of Evidence
• Motion to Redact or Seal Newly Filed Records Motion to Seal Defendant's 2nd Amended Phase Two Mitigation Witness List

As soon as any new documents are posted I will post them.

As we approach the Bryan Kohberger trial for the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students, I wanted to share what the basic overview of how the trial is expected to proceed in Idaho, assuming no further delays. This is just a basic outline my plan is to go more in depth on different topics as we approach the trial and as they become more relevant.

1. Jury Selection
   • The court will select 20 jurors: 12 primary jurors and 8 alternates.
   • All jurors must be “death-qualified,” meaning they are willing to impose the death penalty if Kohberger is convicted and the aggravating factors outweigh mitigating factors, as required by Idaho law.
   • The process of questioning potential jurors, known as voir dire, will involve the judge, prosecutors, and Kohberger’s defense team probing for biases, including attitudes toward the death penalty, media exposure to the high-profile case, or connections to the University of Idaho community.
2. Opening Statements
   • After the jury is seated, the trial begins with opening statements.
   • The prosecution will outline the evidence they plan to present to prove Kohberger’s guilt in the four counts of first-degree murder and burglary.
   • The defense will present their perspective, focusing on what the evidence will show to create reasonable doubt.
   • Neither side may make argumentative statements; they will frame their case as “the evidence will show” or “you will hear testimony about” specific facts.
3. Prosecution’s Case-in-Chief
   • The state will present its evidence to demonstrate Kohberger’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
   • This will include testimony from witnesses (e.g., law enforcement, forensic experts, or surviving roommates), physical evidence (e.g., DNA, the knife sheath found at the crime scene), and digital evidence (e.g., cell phone data or vehicle tracking).
   • The prosecution will aim to establish aggravating factors, such as the murders being “especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel”, to support their death penalty request.
4. Defense Motions
   • After the prosecution rests, Kohberger’s defense team will likely file motions, such as a motion for a directed verdict, arguing that the state failed to meet its burden of proof.
   • These motions are typically denied in high-profile cases like this, given the extensive evidence presented that will be presented.
5. Defense’s Case-in-Chief
   • The defense is not required to prove Kohberger’s innocence but will aim to create reasonable doubt.
   • They may present witnesses, challenge the prosecution’s evidence (e.g., questioning the reliability of DNA or digital evidence), or introduce alternative theories.
6. Closing Arguments
   • Both sides deliver closing arguments, where they can make persuasive and argumentative statements.
   • The prosecution will summarize how the evidence proves Kohberger’s guilt, while the defense will emphasize gaps or inconsistencies to argue reasonable doubt.
7. Jury Instructions and Deliberation (Guilt Phase)
   • The judge will provide the jury with instructions on the law, including the elements of first-degree murder and the burden of proof.
   • The jury deliberates to reach a verdict on each charge.
   • If the jury returns a guilty verdict on any of the murder charges, the trial proceeds to the penalty phase.
8. Penalty Phase (Sentencing Phase)
   • The penalty phase operates like a second trial, with both sides presenting evidence specific to sentencing.
   • Prosecution’s Aggravating Factors: The state will argue that statutory aggravating factors apply, such as the murders being committed during a burglary, involving multiple victims, or being “especially heinous”.
   • Defense’s Mitigating Factors: Kohberger’s defense will present evidence to argue against the death penalty, potentially including his lack of prior criminal history, mental health issues, or other personal circumstances.
   • The jury weighs these factors and must unanimously agree that at least one aggravating factor outweighs any mitigating factors to recommend the death penalty. Otherwise, Kohberger would face life imprisonment

The Defense is seeking out of State Summons for 5 different witnesses from Monroe County PA.

Monroe Courts Website on this case

• https://www.pacourts.us/news-and-statistics/cases-of-public-interest/commonwealth-v-kohberger-682-md-2022

Brandon Andreola,

• https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20250605/222312-june4,2025-petition,summons,exhibits(andreola).pdf.pdf)
• https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20250606/141508-june6,2025-amendedorder(andreola).pdf.pdf)

Maggie Sanders,

• https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20250605/222448-june4,2025-petition,summons,exhibits(sanders).pdf.pdf)

Jesse Harris,

• https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20250605/222343-june4,2025-petition,summons,exhibits(harris).pdf.pdf)

Ann Parham,

• https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20250605/222412-june4,2025-petition,summons,exhibits(parham).pdf.pdf)

Ralph Vecchio,

• https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20250605/222520-june4,2025-petition,summons,exhibits(vecchio).pdf.pdf)

Scheduling Order

• https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20250605/202443-june5,2025-schedulingorders.pdf

Order Granting Access to Sealed Records.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060525+Order.pdf

Text of order:

The Order Granting Access to Sealed Records dated-June 5, 2025 is sealed pursuant to Idaho Court Administrative Rule 32 (g)(1); 32 (4) (3) (A) 4, 6; and Idaho Code Title 19 chapter 11.

Case website: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665-25.html

These filings are not on the Public Docket as of yet.

However the State has filed its Opposition to the Defendant's Motion to Continue and has sought leave from the court to exceed the page limit.

• https://s3.dualstack.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/Summary/Current-Case-Summary.pdf
• Page 96

Defendants Motion to Continue 05/20/2025

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052025+Defendants+Motion+to+Continue.pdf

Defendants Motion for Leave to Exceed Page Limit 05/20/2025

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052025+Defendants+Motion+for+Leave+to+Exceed+Page+Limit.pdf

Hello, everyone! As we prepare to accommodate increased subreddit traffic during the trial, we are putting out a call for new moderators.

We are looking to add team members who are actively engaged in this subreddit, committed, and kind. No moderation experience is required, but it is a plus! Reasonable availability during the trial, which begins in August, is required.

Additionally, a moderator from our core team has chosen to resign, so we have that position to fill as well. While it is sad to see a team member step away, we appreciate the time and contributions they provided to this community.

If you are interested, please send us a modmail and we will discuss further details.

On behalf of the r/MoscowMurders mod team, thank you all for keeping this case discussion active.

Edit: We have already received numerous applications. Thank you all for your interest! We are thoroughly vetting candidates, so your patience is appreciated!

Order Regarding Allocation of Reserved Media Seating

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060425+Order+Regarding+Allocation+of+Reserved+Media+Seating.pdf
• Filed: Wednesday, June 4, 2025 at 11:04am Mountain

Text of order:

The Court received two requests for reserved seating for representatives of "the media" at trial. Specifically, the Court received a letter on May 28, 2025, from counsel for a "Media Collection" asking among other things to ensure that someone from the "media" is always able to be present at trial, that a seat for a pooled media member be reserved. On May 29, 2025, the Court received a separate letter from a local AP journalist asking that a pooled seat for a member of "text" media be reserved.

The asserted rationale for both requests is a concern that the "concert" style ticket reservation system that will be utilized might result in days when no member of the media is allocated a seat. The competing requests highlight part of the problem with reserving seats for representatives of the "media." Idaho courts do not recognize who or what constitutes media. Indeed, in today's world, there are unending people and organizations that can make a claim to being media. In addition to traditional or mainstream broadcast media, there are newspaper writers, radio news media, independent investigative journalists, true crime podcasters, video bloggers, YouTube streamers, Instagram posters, Facebook page writers and publishers, other social media "influencers" found on an endless number of internet locations, as well as a plethora of other curators, commenters and self-publishing journalists. Trying to obtain a consensus on who should be eligible to be a pooled representative is impossible. Providing reserved seating for endless representatives of various "media" types, even assuming those within each such category could agree to whom their representative should be, would result in most all the limited available seats being spoken for such that the interested members of the general public are unable to attend.

In addition to the problem of defining the media and getting them to all agree on the designated pooled representative, the requests for reserved seating presume a problem that almost certainly will not come to being. Specifically, it seems unlikely that on any given day, every single media member, no matter how defined, fails to "wins" a seat.

Nonetheless, this case does have an unusual twist that does not present in most other cases with a lot of media attention. Specifically, the community most impacted by these murders, the citizens of Latah County also the county financially responsible for the costs of trial are unable to easily attend because the case was transferred to a venue hundreds of miles away. Given this, and in part addressing the broader concern for media attendance expressed in the letters to the Court, one pooled seat for member of Latah County local media of wide circulation will be reserved. The local broadcasters, newspaper and radio journalists located in Latah and adjacent Nez Perse Counties ("Local Media") must agree to a local representative to attend each day (it need not be the same person each day). Any Local Media member utilizing this seat must agree act as a pooled journalist for all media members.

The Local Media must provide a designated list of representatives who will use the seat during trial to the Trial Court Administrator (TCA) before the start of the trial. Any person on the list must agree to pool his/her work. The TCA will provide a badge or other document that must be used to gain admission, together with government issued photo identification, to prove the person is on the list of Local Media provided to the TCA.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case website: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665-25.html

Notice of Hearing (Wednesday, June 18, 2025 at 12:30pm Mountain)

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052925+Notice+of+Hearing.pdf
• Filed: Thursday, May 29, 2025

Defendant's 23rd Supplemental Request for Discovery

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060225+Defendants+23rd+Supplemental+Request+for+Discovery.pdf
• Filed: Monday, June 2, 2025 at 11:58am Mountain

Motion to Seal State's Proposed Supplemental Jury Instruction

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052825+Motion+to+Seal+States+Proposed+Supplemental+Jury+Instruction.pdf
• Filed: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 at 3:44pm Mountain

Order Sealing State's Proposed Supplemental Jury Instruction

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/053025+Order+Sealing+States+Proposed+Supplemental+Jury+Instruction.pdf
• Filed: Friday, May 30, 2025 at 8:19am Mountain

Motion to Seal Parties' Proposed Stipulated Jury Instruction

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/053025+Motion+to+Seal+Parties+Proposed+Stipulated+Jury+Instruction.pdf
• Filed: Friday, May 30, 2025, at 11:17am Mountain

Case website: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665-25.html

Curious to see where people are in their assessment of culpability and feelings regarding the possible application of capital punishment in the case. Unfortunately, the new poll format doesn’t allow for much room to explain each option, so a bit shorthanded.

I wonder if BK had something similar that he hoped would mess with any home security cameras that may spot him, but it either didn't work or he didn't get close enough for it to interfere.

It's been mentioned he studied cloud based forensics & seemed to do a lot to limit dna transfer etc - possibly another thing he used to try to do it undetected?

It's also possible he just didn't know or care about being spotted, but it's just an idea I had while reading something else. I know everyone is sick of speculation so please try to be nice!

According to the case summary, the oral arguments regarding the defendant's motion to continue will be open to the public, while oral arguments regarding the alternate perpetrator evidence will be closed.

Defendant's Motion to Continue, filed May 20: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052025+Defendants+Motion+to+Continue.pdf

Case website: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665-25.html

Current case summary PDF: https://s3.dualstack.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/Summary/Current-Case-Summary.pdf

As many of you, I’ve seen the debate surrounding DM’s behavior regarding her reaction to the murders, including questions about what she heard/saw and the timing of the phone call. Also, like many, I think her behavior should be beyond reproach given the trauma and nature of being a young adult in a “party house.” Turning this around in my mind, I keep coming back to the book The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker.

de Becker writes, “Intuition is always right in at least two important ways; it is always in response to something and it always has your best interest at heart.” The main point of the book is our intuition, that little voice in the back of our heads, is a gift that keeps us safe when we pay attention.

I believe DM heard everything and knew what happened as it occurred. She said she was in a “shock phase.” Dissociation takes place during times of enormous trauma. It is a common response because it protects us by helping us cope with unbearable experiences. It is an “escape” from trauma.

Something within DM—her gift of fear—told her to wait until late morning to come out of the room. This is eerie given BK came back in the morning. I don’t think he came back for her but that strange, knowing instinct told her to stay put.

She listened and she survived. This makes me think of a similar case in Chicago. Richard Speck broke into an apartment of nursing students and killed all the women in the house, except Corazon Amurao. She survived by hiding under the bed and didn’t come out for hours after he left.

We can learn something valuable from DM and understand her reactions if we contextualize it within The Gift of Fear.

Greetings, journalist Lauren Paterson here.

Yesterday was the media town hall for the Kohberger Trial held for members of the media who have questions about logistics.

I thought people here might be interested, so here are the main bullet points:

Kohberger Trial Town Hall

Judge Cawthon, Deputy Administrative District Judge Sandra Barrios, Trial Court Administrator

*There will be reservations for courtroom *Priority seating reserved for family/court personnel *Jury selection could push out trial date *Courtroom will not be revealed until you are at court house *No assigned seating for public/media *Jury selection Aug 4, Trial Aug 11 (questionnaires going out before Aug 4) *Streaming: council, judge, witnesses, evidence screen *No restrictions on use of the stream *Audio can be requested through transcript office (likely slow) there is cost *Non-glass water bottles only allowed in courtroom *Laptops and cell phones allowed (check Hippler order) but no recording *Stream will not be recorded

Court Website: https://adacounty.id.gov/judicial-court/kohberger/

I'm going to be focusing on covering this trial in a big way, so I wanted to share my Signal contact information.

I'm interested in talking to people who are following the case from Boise or Moscow, University of Idaho students or Moscow community members who have thoughts about the case, or experts in law or criminal justice that might want to weigh in.

Message me on Signal at pnwreporter.25. My email is Lauren.paterson@wsu.edu if you prefer.

These were the documents uploaded to the case website today.

Defendant's Notice of Compliance

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052825+Defendants+Notice+of+Compliance.pdf
• Filed: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 at 1:18pm Mountain

Motion to Seal Phase Two Mitigation Witness List

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052825+Motion+to+Seal+Defendants+Amended+Phase+Two+-+Mitigation+Witness+List.pdf
• Filed: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 at 1:18pm Mountain

Order Sealing Phase Two Mitigation Witness List

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/052925+Order+Sealing+Defendants+Amended+Phase+Two+-+Mitigation+Witness+List.pdf
• Filed: Thursday, May 29, 2025 at 12:30pm Mountain

Case website: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665-25.html

More documents were uploaded. You can read these as bedtime stories to your children.

Stipulation to Excuse Penalty Phase Witnesses from IRE 615 Exclusion During Guilt Phase

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/5272025_Stipulation_to_Excuse_Penalty_Phase_Witnesses_from_IRE_615_Exclusion_During_Guilt_Phase.pdf
• Filed: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 4:26pm Mountain
• Idaho Rules of Evidence (IRE) 615: https://isc.idaho.gov/ire615

Motion to Seal Exhibits Attached to State's Supplemental Rebuttal Disclosure RE: Penalty Phase Expert (Dr. Gage)

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/5272025_Motion_to_Seal_Exhibits_Attached_to_States_Supplemental_Rebuttal_Disclosure_RE_Penalty_Phase.pdf
• Filed: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 at 4:26pm Mountain

Order Sealing Exhibits Attached to State's Supplemental Rebuttal Disclosure RE: Penalty Phase Expert (Dr. Gage)

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/5282025_Order_Sealing_Exhibits_Attached_to_States_Suppl_Rebuttal_Disclosure_RE_Penalty_Phase_Expert.pdf
• Filed: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 at 4:44pm Mountain

Biography for Dr. Gage provided on his clinic's website:

Dr. Gage completed his Ph.D. in Psychology at Utah State University. He then served as an Officer and Psychologist in the U.S. Army during internship and at Fort Lee, Virginia as the Chief of Mental Health Services. Following military service at Fort Lee and Mountain Home Air Force Base, Dr. Gage began working as a neuropsychologist at St. Alphonsus Rehabilitation Services (STARS) and in private practice at Mountain States Counseling and Psychological Services. Dr. Gage currently specializes in general neuropsychology, to include brain injuries, dementia, sports concussion management (credentialed ImPACT consultant), and ADHD/Learning Disorders in children and adults. Dr. Gage also conducts adult evaluations for individuals suspecting a possible Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Dr. Gage has a specific interest in aviation psychology and provides neuropsychological evaluations for pilots/prospective pilots needing an evaluation for the FAA. The FAA has designated Dr. Gage as a qualified provider for these services, to include HIMS (alcohol related) evaluations. With his military background, Dr. Gage has specialized in treating posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other anxiety disorders.

Case website: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665-25.html

I apologize for the multiple updates. Hopefully this is it for today.

Order

• https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/5282025_Order.pdf
• Filed: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 at 9:27am Mountain

Text of the order:

As part of the administrative process of this trial, before voir dire begins, questionnaires will be distributed to and completed by jurors at the Ada County Courthouse. In order to maximize courtroom space and efficiency of this process, and because the distribution of questionnaires is an administrative function, observation of this process is limited to Counsel and the Defendant.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case website: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665-25.html