The trial of the homicide of the four young college students is set for August 11th, 2025 in Boise Idaho. Judge Steven Hippler, who was appointed by Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter as a District Judge for the 4th Judicial District Court, has replaced Judge John Judge, because the trial was moved from Moscow, Idaho to Boise, Idaho, by the Idaho Supreme court, due to the heightened media attention, and possible media pollution of the Moscow jury pool. As the scrum continues in Boise, Idaho, both parties are filing various motions with the court, jockeying for position before the main event, that is the trial, will begin. Several of the motions filed with the court have been requesting “orders in limine”. “in limine" (pronounced “en le-me-na”) is a Latin term meaning “on the threshold”. In a legal sense, it is a function requesting the Judge to exclude or prevent exclusion of certain information, which the requesting party perceives could prejudice the jury thus resulting in a false conclusion, or is necessary for a proper trial to be concluded. Due to a gag order preventing information vital to the public interest from being disclosed, because that information, in the judges view, could implant false positives into the minds of possible jurists, much information about this trial has been kept under seal. However, in the most recent “in limine” filings, several tidbits of information have been revealed. Namely cell phone text messages between the two surviving roommates, and content revealed in interviews with lawmen from Moscow, Idaho, by D.M. ( who is the 2nd floor surviving roommate and the only eyewitness to the crime). In addition, lots of surveillance footage has been requested by the State of Idaho to be included into the court for trial. We soon approach the sound of the gavel.

How did D.M. know the intruder she claims to have seen was a man?

According to court records, DM claims in grand jury testimony she saw an unknown male in the residence, yet during a text exchange between BF (surviving roommate who lived downstairs on the first floor of a tri level house) , and herself at the alleged time of the incidence, She(DM), the surviving second floor roomate, claims to have seen a figure all dressed in black wearing headgear and face covering similar to a middle eastern Shemagh during text exchanges between her and B.F.. That is the forehead is covered and the face is covered with a rectangular shaped cloth or scarf like item. The Shemagh is an important headdress in the modern day video game “Assassin's Creed” which has become popular among the college students due to its historical references. If in fact the assailant was covered as she describes in the text exchange how did she know it was a male? An important note, during this contemporaneous exchange she makes no reference about the assailant holding a ”knife”. It is highly unlikely the assailant tried to resheath the knife after the final stabbing if Kohberger is the killer, because he would have known the sheath was missing, while he was in the house at 4:00am in the morning. Thus, after the last stabbing the only eyewitness does not see the killer walking away with a knife in his hand? Nor can she confirm the intruder exited through the 2nd floor sliding glass door. D.M. attempts to call or contact all the victims around 4:25 am in the morning of the 13th of November, 2022. She received no reply. No one called 911 at this time. At some time after her seeing the intruder and her attempts to call the victims she makes a run for B. F.’s room one floor below hers. They both sleep until about 10:23 am in the morning when the cell phone of D.M. records a text from her to Goncalves. No reply. D.M. calls her father at 11:39am. The 911 call is made, 8 hours later, from the cell phone of B.F. at 11:56 am on 13-11-2022.

“He is wearing a mask that just covers his forehead and - - here, and it, goes, like, around.”

The defense has asked for the term “Bushy Eyebrows” to be excluded from the trial.

After the police arrived at the crime scene, D.M. was interrogated by officer Nunes. According to court records, during this initial interview she does not use the term “ bushy eyebrows” to describe the intruder. She does not mention eyebrows at all. Subsequently, in an interview with Detective Mowery, later on the day of the crime, at the police station, she was asked directly by Detective Mowery about the intruder's eyes or eyebrows? She did not confirm as to knowing the color of the intruder's eyes or eyebrows nor confirm the weight of eyebrow hair. At this interview she does not recall anything of significance about the intruder's facial features. During a canvassing of D.M’s room Detective Lake noticed D.M. had drawings of eyes and eyebrows on the walls of her room. She was an amateur artist. Detective Lake described the drawings of eyebrows as prominent. In an interview four days later with Detective Gooch, she does mention the intruder to have had “bushy eyebrows”, and claims the intruder was within 3 feet of her. She cannot recall any other details. In addition, she claimed the details of her recall of the intruder's bushy eyebrows were not strong enough to interface with a composite sketch artist because she was very sleepy and under the influence. She claimed to have been suffering from alcohol intoxication on the night of the crime. She also told Detective Gooch during the interview she suffered from lucid dreams of being chased. In another interview one half month later, she can only describe seeing only one eyebrow as being bushy , and still claiming she was too drunk and sleepy to be sure. She cannot remember any geometry of the eyebrow, only that the one eyebrow was bushy. In this interview she claimed the person she saw was a ”fireman” . Twentynine days after this interview the authorities used her statements to support an affidavit for an arrest warrant. After the arrest of Mr. Kohbereger D.M., the only eye witness to the crime could not identify Mr. Kohberger as the intruder.  The concept of bushy eyebrows is speculative. Bushy eyebrows to one person, may not seem bushy to another. Is it possible with the low level of lighting that night she confused bushy eyebrows for long eyelashes? Many media institutions have pursued this bushy eyebrow statement implanted in the affidavit for arrest, for lack of other evidence,  to forge a link between Mr.Kohberger who does not have bushy eyebrows, for a man, and the killer. It has been a blitze of picture/ word association with the Mr. Kohberger’s mugshot and the term “bushy eyebrows”. By using interval recall the media has implanted in the minds of the public that  Mr. Kohberger has bushy eyebrows therefore he must be the killer. It is simply inconclusive. In fact, with the disclosure of these additional court filings, the reliability of the witness identification  of Mr. Kohberger or his eyebrow configuration is non-existent.  

The first US state to legalize recreational use of marijuana was the State of Washington. In the state of Idaho marijuana is not legal.  The state of Idaho filed motions for an order in limine to allow video surveillance from Floyds Cannabis Company, from Pullman, Washinging, to be admitted at the trial. This is the first tidbit of information from court filings that  disclose the possibility of other drugs that may have been present or influencing the various players in this crime. Since the State of Idaho is requesting the inclusion of video surveillance of a local marijuana smoke shop in Pullam, Washington, the State of Idaho may attempt to  extrapolate  a connection between Mr. Kohberger  and marijuana with the possible marijuana psychosis implications. The State of Idaho has strong sentiments against the illegalization of marijuana thus a connection between marijuana and  Mr Kohberger could influence the jury's perspective of Mr Kohbergers state of mind on November 12/13 2022.   

The trial begins this summer in Boise Idaho.