The Moscow Murders and More

It is an uphill battle for "Jane" to maintain her anonymity in the Sean "Diddy" Combs trial due to the extraordinary public interest and media scrutiny surrounding the case. The combination of Combs’ celebrity status, the severity of the charges—racketeering, sex trafficking, and related offenses—and the cultural weight of the #MeToo movement has turned this trial into a national spectacle. Every courtroom development is being live-blogged, dissected on social media, and aggressively pursued by entertainment outlets, making it difficult for any witness to avoid public exposure. Additionally, "Jane" has provided some of the most graphic and emotionally charged testimony thus far, implicating Combs in deeply disturbing acts that drive the government’s core narrative of coercion and abuse. Her role is so central that her testimony is likely to be the subject of intense post-trial analysis and media pursuit, increasing the risk of her identity leaking through unofficial channels even if the court maintains a protective order. Moreover, federal courtrooms, unlike many state courts, do not allow video recording or live broadcasting, which does offer some protection. However, this is counterbalanced by the aggressive reporting of major outlets and the presence of numerous journalists in the courtroom, all eager to unearth every detail about the key witnesses. The very nature of "Jane’s" testimony—recounting intimate and traumatic experiences—has already made her a figure of intense curiosity. Compounding this, her prior relationship with Combs, her visibility in the New York nightlife scene, and mentions of specific events and dates in testimony create a breadcrumb trail that determined parties, whether members of the press or online sleuths, could follow to uncover her real identity. In such a high-profile case, history shows that anonymity is difficult to preserve once public and media obsession reaches a certain pitch. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Who is Jane? Diddy trial's anonymous witness testifies Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On the afternoon of June 5, 2025, during Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking trial in Manhattan, a woman testifying under the pseudonym "Jane" recounted harrowing experiences from their relationship, which began in late 2020. She described being coerced into participating in prolonged, drug-fueled sexual encounters, termed "hotel nights" or "freak-offs," often involving male escorts and excessive use of baby oil—sometimes up to two dozen bottles in a single session. These events, she testified, were orchestrated by Combs, who would direct the activities while observing and masturbating. Jane detailed how she was expected to wear specific attire, such as provocative lingerie and high heels, and adhere to Combs' preferences regarding her appearance, including hair and nail styles. Despite expressing her discomfort and repeatedly telling Combs that she did not want to engage in sex with other men, she felt compelled to comply due to his financial control over her, including paying her rent and providing substantial cash payments. Jane's testimony aligns with earlier accounts from other witnesses, including singer Cassie Ventura and former assistant "Mia," who have accused Combs of similar patterns of abuse and coercion. During her emotional testimony, Jane spoke softly, often avoiding eye contact with Combs, who was present in the courtroom. The proceedings were marked by heightened tension, especially after Judge Arun Subramanian admonished Combs for attempting to interact with the jury through nods and facial expressions, warning that any further misconduct could result in his removal from the courtroom. The trial, now in its fourth week, continues to delve into allegations that Combs used his influence and resources to exploit women over a span of two decades to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: June 5, 2025 - Day 17 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNN Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a filing to Judge Subramanian in United States v. Combs, S3 24 Cr. 542 (AS), the Government requests permission to admit limited additional testimony from expert witness Dr. Dawn Hughes. This request comes in response to what prosecutors describe as "forceful and repeated" arguments made by the defense during their cross-examination of the witness known as Mia. The defense, the Government argues, presented misleading implications about Mia’s behavior and credibility—specifically regarding how victims of abuse are expected to act. Prosecutors contend that this line of questioning has "opened the door" for rebuttal testimony addressing misconceptions about trauma responses. The Government seeks to have Dr. Hughes offer expert insight drawn from her original notice, focused solely on clarifying how victims of abuse often exhibit behaviors that may seem counterintuitive to jurors unfamiliar with trauma psychology—such as delayed reporting, continued contact with abusers, or minimized disclosure. This testimony, they assert, is necessary to correct the jury’s potential misinterpretation created by the defense's narrative. The request is framed as narrow in scope and designed not to go beyond the boundaries previously set by the Court, but rather to preserve the integrity of the witness's testimony in light of the defense’s strategy. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.376.0_1.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a filing to Judge Subramanian in United States v. Combs, S3 24 Cr. 542 (AS), the Government requests permission to admit limited additional testimony from expert witness Dr. Dawn Hughes. This request comes in response to what prosecutors describe as "forceful and repeated" arguments made by the defense during their cross-examination of the witness known as Mia. The defense, the Government argues, presented misleading implications about Mia’s behavior and credibility—specifically regarding how victims of abuse are expected to act. Prosecutors contend that this line of questioning has "opened the door" for rebuttal testimony addressing misconceptions about trauma responses. The Government seeks to have Dr. Hughes offer expert insight drawn from her original notice, focused solely on clarifying how victims of abuse often exhibit behaviors that may seem counterintuitive to jurors unfamiliar with trauma psychology—such as delayed reporting, continued contact with abusers, or minimized disclosure. This testimony, they assert, is necessary to correct the jury’s potential misinterpretation created by the defense's narrative. The request is framed as narrow in scope and designed not to go beyond the boundaries previously set by the Court, but rather to preserve the integrity of the witness's testimony in light of the defense’s strategy. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.376.0_1.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this filing, the government submits its proposed jury instructions, also known as “requests to charge,” ahead of Sean Combs’ upcoming trial. These instructions lay out how the jury should interpret the law as it applies to the charges in the Third Superseding Indictment, including conspiracy, racketeering (RICO), drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and related offenses. The government requests standard instructions on presumption of innocence, burden of proof, credibility of witnesses (including cooperating witnesses and law enforcement), and the meaning of reasonable doubt. Critically, it also asks the court to include specific legal definitions tied to each alleged crime—for example, the elements of a RICO enterprise and the requirements for proving participation in a drug distribution conspiracy. Furthermore, the government includes instructions regarding the consideration of co-conspirator statements, evidence of prior bad acts, and accomplice testimony, reflecting the sensitive and complex nature of the allegations against Combs. The proposed charges emphasize that the jury must evaluate the case based solely on the evidence presented, without speculation or bias, and that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. These instructions, if accepted by the judge, will guide the jury through the legal standards necessary to determine whether Combs is guilty on any or all of the multiple felony counts he faces. The submission underscores the government's intent to secure clear, legally sound guidance for the jury in what is expected to be a high-profile and multifaceted trial. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.275.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this filing, the government submits its proposed jury instructions, also known as “requests to charge,” ahead of Sean Combs’ upcoming trial. These instructions lay out how the jury should interpret the law as it applies to the charges in the Third Superseding Indictment, including conspiracy, racketeering (RICO), drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and related offenses. The government requests standard instructions on presumption of innocence, burden of proof, credibility of witnesses (including cooperating witnesses and law enforcement), and the meaning of reasonable doubt. Critically, it also asks the court to include specific legal definitions tied to each alleged crime—for example, the elements of a RICO enterprise and the requirements for proving participation in a drug distribution conspiracy. Furthermore, the government includes instructions regarding the consideration of co-conspirator statements, evidence of prior bad acts, and accomplice testimony, reflecting the sensitive and complex nature of the allegations against Combs. The proposed charges emphasize that the jury must evaluate the case based solely on the evidence presented, without speculation or bias, and that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. These instructions, if accepted by the judge, will guide the jury through the legal standards necessary to determine whether Combs is guilty on any or all of the multiple felony counts he faces. The submission underscores the government's intent to secure clear, legally sound guidance for the jury in what is expected to be a high-profile and multifaceted trial. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.275.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​Bryan Kohberger, charged with the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students, has filed a motion titled "Strike Death Penalty RE: Autism Spectrum Disorder" in an effort to remove the death penalty as a sentencing option if convicted. The details of this motion remain sealed, leaving it unclear whether Kohberger has been formally diagnosed with autism or if his defense team is pursuing such a diagnosis. This strategy represents the latest attempt by Kohberger's defense to challenge the application of the death penalty in his case. Previously, his attorneys have argued that Idaho's methods of execution, such as lethal injection and firing squad, constitute cruel and unusual punishment, and that evolving standards in the U.S. reflect a shift away from capital punishment. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: 022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-13-RE-Conditions-Aggravator.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In his affidavit, defense expert Sy Ray challenges the State's motion regarding AT&T Timing Advance records in the case against Bryan Kohberger. Ray asserts that AT&T's Timing Advance data, which can accurately determine a mobile device's location, was available and utilized by law enforcement during their 2022 investigation. He provides evidence that the FBI obtained such data from AT&T for over 3,800 devices, excluding Kohberger's, and contends that the prosecution's claim—that AT&T did not produce Timing Advance records in 2022—is misleading. Ray suggests that the absence of Kohberger's Timing Advance data is either a significant deviation from standard investigative procedures or indicative of intentional withholding of exculpatory evidence. He concludes that the prosecution's motion misrepresents the facts and aims to conceal potentially exonerating information. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: 032625+Defendants+Notice+of+Filing+Affidavit+iso+Obj+to+the+States+MIL+RE+ATT+Timing+Advance+Records.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​Bryan Kohberger, charged with the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students, has been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), according to his defense attorney, Anne Taylor. Taylor argues that this diagnosis should exempt him from the death penalty, contending that ASD diminishes his culpability and that his behaviors, such as avoiding eye contact and repetitive movements, might be misinterpreted by jurors as signs of guilt or lack of remorse. She also highlights that Kohberger's ASD-related communication challenges hinder his ability to participate effectively in his defense. Legal experts, however, are skeptical of this argument's success. They note that while ASD can be considered a mitigating factor during sentencing, it does not typically preclude the application of the death penalty. In Idaho, the death penalty is applicable unless the defendant is intellectually disabled, a criterion distinct from ASD. Therefore, despite the defense's efforts, it is unlikely that Kohberger's ASD diagnosis will prevent prosecutors from seeking capital punishment in this case. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Kohberger’s team: Autism should negate Idaho death penalty. Experts say it’s a stretch Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​Prosecutors in the Bryan Kohberger case have introduced evidence indicating that Kohberger purchased a Ka-Bar knife, along with a sheath and sharpener, from Amazon between March 20 and March 30, 2022—approximately eight months prior to the November 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students. A knife sheath found at the crime scene contained Kohberger's DNA, strengthening the prosecution's argument that the sheath belonged to him. Additionally, prosecutors have obtained a selfie Kohberger took hours after the killings, which they plan to use to corroborate an eyewitness description of the suspect having "bushy eyebrows." The defense has filed motions to exclude Kohberger's Amazon purchase history and the "bushy eyebrows" description from trial, arguing that such evidence is prejudicial and could deny him a fair trial. Despite these efforts, the prosecution maintains that the Amazon purchase history is relevant, as it shows Kohberger's acquisition of a knife matching the sheath found at the crime scene. The trial is scheduled to begin on August 11, 2025, with prosecutors indicating their intent to seek the death penalty if Kohberger is convicted. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Idaho prosecutors: Kohberger bought Ka-Bar knife, sheath | Idaho Statesman Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In Case Number CR01-24-31665, defendant Bryan C. Kohberger has filed a reply to the State's response concerning his motion to exclude Amazon click activity evidence at trial. Kohberger's defense argues that the State's recent expert disclosures, submitted on March 14, 2025, are untimely and violate discovery deadlines, potentially infringing upon his constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial. The defense emphasizes that Amazon's data is intricate, involving complex algorithms and machine learning processes that cannot be accurately interpreted without expert testimony. They contend that presenting this data without proper context would mislead the jury, especially given the incomplete and selectively presented nature of the evidence. Furthermore, the defense highlights that the State's attempt to self-authenticate the Amazon records without expert explanation is inappropriate due to the complexity of the data. They assert that the State's pattern of late disclosures and failure to comply with court orders regarding evidence and expert opinions hampers Kohberger's ability to prepare an effective defense. As a result, the defense seeks to protect Kohberger's constitutional rights by requesting the exclusion of the Amazon click activity evidence from the trial. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Ty A Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On the morning of June 5, 2025, the federal sex trafficking trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs in Manhattan continued with the defense's cross-examination of Bryana "Bana" Bongolan, a close friend of Combs's ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Bongolan had previously testified about a harrowing 2016 incident where Combs allegedly dangled her over a 17th-floor balcony while shouting profanities, then threw her onto furniture, causing physical injuries. During cross-examination, defense attorneys sought to challenge her credibility by highlighting inconsistencies in her account, questioning her history of drug use, and pointing out her involvement in a separate lawsuit against Combs. Despite these efforts, Bongolan maintained her allegations, which align with Ventura's earlier testimony describing a pattern of abuse and coercion by Combs. Following the conclusion of Bongolan's testimony, prosecutors prepared to call a key witness, identified only by the pseudonym "Jane," to the stand. Jane is expected to provide testimony about her alleged experiences with Combs, including participation in so-called "freak-off" sex marathons and instances of abuse. Her account is anticipated to reinforce the prosecution's case, which portrays Combs as orchestrating a pattern of manipulation and exploitation over several years. The court has taken measures to protect Jane's identity, including restricting media access during her testimony. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: @innercitypress Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the case of John Doe v. Sean Combs et al. (No. 1:24-cv-07973-RA), the plaintiff opposes the Combs Defendants' motion to dismiss, asserting that the complaint sufficiently alleges claims of sexual assault, battery, and related misconduct. The plaintiff argues that the detailed allegations meet the legal standards required to proceed, emphasizing that the complaint provides specific instances of the defendants' alleged wrongful conduct. Furthermore, the plaintiff contends that the motion to dismiss should be denied because the claims are not barred by any applicable statutes of limitations, and the complaint adequately states claims upon which relief can be granted. The plaintiff also addresses the defendants' arguments regarding the sufficiency of the pleadings and the applicability of certain defenses, maintaining that these issues are more appropriately addressed at later stages of the litigation, such as summary judgment or trial. By highlighting the factual allegations and legal theories presented in the complaint, the plaintiff seeks to demonstrate that the case merits further judicial proceedings and should not be dismissed at this preliminary stage. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.630242.68.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

After the lunch break on June 4, 2025, the federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs continued with the cross-examination of Bryana "Bana" Bongolan. Bongolan, a close friend of Cassie Ventura, had earlier testified about a 2016 incident where Combs allegedly lifted her over a 17th-floor balcony railing and then threw her onto patio furniture, causing physical injuries and lasting psychological trauma. During cross-examination, the defense sought to challenge her credibility by highlighting her past drug use and suggesting potential financial motives, noting her pending $10 million lawsuit against Combs. Despite these efforts, Bongolan maintained her account, emphasizing the fear and lasting impact of the alleged assault . The afternoon session also included discussions about upcoming testimonies, notably from a witness referred to as "Jane," who is expected to testify about being coerced into drug-fueled sex acts known as "freak-offs" orchestrated by Combs. The court addressed concerns about maintaining the anonymity of such witnesses, especially after a previous incident where a witness's identity was inadvertently revealed. Judge Arun Subramanian emphasized the importance of protecting witness identities to ensure their safety and the integrity of the proceedings . to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: June 4, 2025 - Day 16 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNN Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In its June 3, 2025 editorial, the Idaho Statesman emphasizes the critical importance of ensuring robust media access to the upcoming trial of Bryan Kohberger, accused of the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students. The editorial argues that transparent media coverage is essential for maintaining public trust in the judicial process, particularly in high-profile cases that have garnered national attention. It underscores that the presence of journalists in the courtroom serves as a check on the legal system, providing the public with accurate and timely information. The piece also addresses concerns about the current system for reserving courtroom seats, suggesting that it may inadvertently limit media access and, by extension, public oversight. The Statesman advocates for a more equitable approach that guarantees space for credentialed journalists, ensuring that the proceedings are documented comprehensively. By facilitating full media presence, the editorial contends, the court can uphold the principles of transparency and accountability that are foundational to the justice system. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Kohberger trial sparks media access concerns | Idaho Statesman Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial against Sean "Diddy" Combs, prosecutors have strategically utilized testimonies from his former assistants and employees to substantiate their case. These individuals have provided detailed accounts of alleged abuse, coercion, and forced labor, painting a picture of a workplace environment that prosecutors argue was integral to Combs' purported criminal enterprise. For instance, a former assistant, testifying under the pseudonym "Mia," described enduring years of sexual assault and psychological manipulation, asserting that she was "brainwashed" during her tenure with Combs. Another former employee, Capricorn Clark, recounted being kidnapped and coerced into participating in violent acts at Combs' behest. These testimonies aim to demonstrate a pattern of behavior consistent with the charges of sex trafficking and racketeering. The prosecution contends that these accounts reveal a systematic effort by Combs to exploit his employees and associates, using intimidation and abuse to maintain control and further his alleged criminal activities. By presenting these narratives, prosecutors seek to establish that Combs' actions were not isolated incidents but part of a broader scheme to manipulate and dominate those within his sphere of influence. This strategy is designed to reinforce the RICO charges by illustrating how Combs allegedly operated his business ventures as fronts for illicit conduct, thereby fulfilling the criteria for a racketeering enterprise under federal law. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Diddy Inc.: Sean Combs’ aides unravel his jet set empire in court Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this filing, the government submits its proposed jury instructions, also known as “requests to charge,” ahead of Sean Combs’ upcoming trial. These instructions lay out how the jury should interpret the law as it applies to the charges in the Third Superseding Indictment, including conspiracy, racketeering (RICO), drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and related offenses. The government requests standard instructions on presumption of innocence, burden of proof, credibility of witnesses (including cooperating witnesses and law enforcement), and the meaning of reasonable doubt. Critically, it also asks the court to include specific legal definitions tied to each alleged crime—for example, the elements of a RICO enterprise and the requirements for proving participation in a drug distribution conspiracy. Furthermore, the government includes instructions regarding the consideration of co-conspirator statements, evidence of prior bad acts, and accomplice testimony, reflecting the sensitive and complex nature of the allegations against Combs. The proposed charges emphasize that the jury must evaluate the case based solely on the evidence presented, without speculation or bias, and that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. These instructions, if accepted by the judge, will guide the jury through the legal standards necessary to determine whether Combs is guilty on any or all of the multiple felony counts he faces. The submission underscores the government's intent to secure clear, legally sound guidance for the jury in what is expected to be a high-profile and multifaceted trial. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.275.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this filing, the government submits its proposed jury instructions, also known as “requests to charge,” ahead of Sean Combs’ upcoming trial. These instructions lay out how the jury should interpret the law as it applies to the charges in the Third Superseding Indictment, including conspiracy, racketeering (RICO), drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and related offenses. The government requests standard instructions on presumption of innocence, burden of proof, credibility of witnesses (including cooperating witnesses and law enforcement), and the meaning of reasonable doubt. Critically, it also asks the court to include specific legal definitions tied to each alleged crime—for example, the elements of a RICO enterprise and the requirements for proving participation in a drug distribution conspiracy. Furthermore, the government includes instructions regarding the consideration of co-conspirator statements, evidence of prior bad acts, and accomplice testimony, reflecting the sensitive and complex nature of the allegations against Combs. The proposed charges emphasize that the jury must evaluate the case based solely on the evidence presented, without speculation or bias, and that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. These instructions, if accepted by the judge, will guide the jury through the legal standards necessary to determine whether Combs is guilty on any or all of the multiple felony counts he faces. The submission underscores the government's intent to secure clear, legally sound guidance for the jury in what is expected to be a high-profile and multifaceted trial. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.275.0.pdf Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

At a recent motions hearing for Bryan Kohberger, the suspect in the University of Idaho student murders, both sides clashed over critical pieces of evidence and the defense’s attempts to challenge the prosecution’s case. The judge denied several of the defense’s motions, including a bid to dismiss the indictment due to grand jury irregularities. Kohberger’s team had argued that the grand jury was misled by an unreliable FBI genetic genealogy analysis and that it violated proper legal standards, but the court found the indictment sufficient to move forward. The defense also tried to suppress certain pieces of evidence, such as cell tower data and body cam footage, claiming they were improperly obtained or prejudicial—efforts that mostly failed. However, not everything went the prosecution's way. The judge did grant the defense more time to scrutinize some of the state’s key evidence, particularly DNA and cellphone data that tie Kohberger to the crime scene. These materials were initially withheld or delayed, and the court acknowledged the defense’s right to fully analyze them. The ruling opens the door for further challenges to the state’s forensic evidence in the future. While the case remains on track for trial, the hearing showed that the defense still has leeway to poke holes in the prosecution’s foundation, especially on the scientific evidence front. The question is, will they be successful? to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: What happened at Bryan Kohberger's hearing? | Fox News Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​On April 9, 2025, Bryan Kohberger appeared in a Boise, Idaho court for a hearing addressing multiple pre-trial motions ahead of his upcoming trial for the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students. The defense sought to exclude several pieces of evidence, including Amazon records allegedly showing Kohberger purchased a Ka-Bar knife and sheath, testimony from a surviving roommate who described an intruder with "bushy eyebrows," 911 call recordings, Kohberger's academic writings on crime scenes, a selfie taken in front of a shower, and weather data potentially undermining his alibi. Additionally, the defense requested the death penalty be removed from consideration, citing Kohberger's autism diagnosis Prosecutors, on the other hand, confirmed their intention to call several of Kohberger's family members as witnesses during the trial. They also sought to prevent the defense from suggesting Kohberger was framed and to prohibit portraying the state's pursuit of the death penalty as an attempt to kill him. Judge Steven Hippler addressed these motions, preliminarily ruling that terms like "psychopath," "sociopath," or "murderer" should not be used during the evidentiary phase. He also indicated that Kohberger's autism diagnosis could be presented as a mitigating factor if convicted but not as an aggravating one. Specific rulings on these motions are expected to be issued at a later date. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmal.com source: Bryan Kohberger makes bombshell claim about TWO Idaho murders killers as judge considers if family will testify | Daily Mail Online Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.