Kathy's InDieZoNe

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation based on the First Amendment concerning the high profile, highly-sealed criminal case of Idaho v. Kohberger deemed closed on July 23, 2025 when Mr. Kohberger was sentenced with a discussion regarding a current SCOTUS case of Hunter v. US RE: appellate waivers which might provide Mr. Kohberger with grounds to appeal his sentence and obtain a second chance at a jury trial.

Everything here represents the pure opinion, commentary, speculation and rhetorical questions per the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states:Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The First Amendment is cited to and quoted in this presentation. It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠#Idaho4

#DueProcess

#GarzavIdaho

#HuntervUS

#FreeSpeech

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation based on the First Amendment concerning the high profile, highly-sealed criminal case of Idaho v. Kohberger deemed closed on July 23, 2025 which still remains largely sealed to the public nearly a year later with a discussion regarding the Defense's 2025 Motion for Appointment of Special Prosecutor. Everything here represents the pure opinion, commentary, speculation and rhetorical questions per the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states:Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The First Amendment is cited to and quoted in this presentation. It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

#Idaho4 #FirstAmendment #FreeSpeech #FreePress #BryanKohberger

In a unanimous ruling by the justices of the South Carolina Supreme Court, two convictions returned against the defendant in the matter styled as South Carolina v. Richard "Alex" Murdaugh for the unalivings of his wife, Maggie, and their 22-year-old son, Paul, on June 7, 2021 have been reversed. We ask the rhetorical question here based on the First Amendment whether the South Carolina officials will refile these charges.

We also provide an update regarding Mr. Murdoch's federal civil rights lawsuit seeking compensatory and punitive damages filed against former Clerk of Court Rebecca "Becky" Hill associated with matters pertaining to the state criminal case. Everything presented here represents the pure opinions and comments of the host for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching and/or research per Amend. I, U.S. Const. and does not nor is it intended to provide legal advice. It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act,which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright.

Here we provide an update and opinions concerning the developments that occurred at the live-streamed May 18, 2026 hearing on a public records lawsuit before Judge Megan E. Marshall - EWU Media LLC vs. City of Moscow/Moscow Police Department and 2 pending matters; The issue of possible dismissal and demand for disclosure of public records sought in public records requests. This is the first known lawsuit that we understand has been filed by a party seeking via public records requests concerning the investigation into the crimes at 1122 King Road and Idaho v. Kohberger.

Released link to Aug. 5, 2026 hearing: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Stream/District-2/Hon-Megan-Marshall.htmlEverything presented here represents the pure opinions and comments of the host for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching and/or research per Amend. I, U.S. Const. and does not nor is it intended to provide legal advice. First AmendmentCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act,which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠#EWUMedia

#CityofMoscow

#Idaho4

#BryanKohberger

#FreeSpeech

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation based on the First Amendment concerning the high profile, highly-sealed criminal case of Idaho v. Kohberger deemed closed on July 23, 2025 which till remains largely sealed to the public nearly a year later. Everything here represents the pure opinion, commentary, speculation and rhetorical questions per the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states:Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The First Amendment is cited to and quoted in this presentation. It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠#Idaho4

#FirstAmendment

#IdahovKohberger

#BryanKohberger

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation concerning the current status of the high-profile federal civil lawsuit styled as Goncalves et al. vs. Washington State University which is proceeding before U.S. District Court Judge Evanson. Discussion is focused on the Court's April 14, 2026 Order Regarding Initial Disclosures and the Joint Status Report which is due May 26, 2026.

Everything here represents the pure opinion, commentary, speculation and rhetorical questions per the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states:Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright. All parties who are charged with crimes are considered innocent under the eyes of the law until or unless they (1) are adjudicated guilty in a court of law or (2) agree to plead guilty.

#WashingtonStateUniversity

#GoncalvesvWSU

#FirstAmendment

#FreePress

#Idaho4

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation per the First Amendment quoting and citing to it while discussing the lack of transparency in the long-closed criminal case of Idaho v. Kohberger and ask the rhetorical question of if Mr. Kohberger decides to appeal his convictions, the legal standard will be set forth in Hunter v. US not Garza v Idaho, the latter of which was addressed by Judge Steven J. Hippler in open court last year. Hunter v. US is a case concerning appellate waivers which is before the US Supreme Court at the present time. LINK to SCOTUS Oral Argument Page: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arg...LINK to Hunter vs. United States SCOTUS case file: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/d...Everything here represents the pure opinion, commentary, speculation and rhetorical questions per the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states:Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation per the First Amendment discussing the State of Idaho v. Stacey James Wondra proceeding dealing with the tragic disappearance of 5 year old Michael Vaughan. Following a public and open preliminary hearing, the matter was scheduled for jury trial in September 2026. Link to the Idaho cases of interest webpage where the State of Idaho v. Wondra court records are published:https://coi.isc.idaho.govEverything here represents the pure opinion, commentary, speculation and rhetorical questions per the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states:Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

#MichaelVaughan

#IdahovWondra

#StaceyJamesWondra

#FreeSpeech

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation concerning events occurring in the Idaho4 Defamation case, a 2 count federal lawsuit alleging defamation of character by a University of Idaho (Moscow) History Professor against an on-line personality/content creator and psychic in the case styled as Rebecca Scofield v. Ashley Guillard. Plaintiff Scofield received a $10,000,000 judgment against Defendant Guillard following a jury trial which the defense has appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. This is an update of the current status of the same.

Here we provide pure opinions, comments and speculation concerning the current status of the defense's appeal of the $10 million judgment entered against her to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal and a document filed May 18, 2026 regarding the appellate transcript by Plaintiff. LINK to our prior podcast on Federal Diversity of Citizenship Jurisdiction in the Idaho4 Defamation Case:   • How a State #Idaho4 Defamation Case Blew U...   (   • How a State #Idaho4 Defamation Case Blew U...  ) Everything here represents the pure opinion, commentary, speculation and rhetorical questions per the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states at Amendment I:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright. #Idaho4

#RebeccaScofield

#AshleyGuillard

#Defamation

#FreeSpeech

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation concerning a federal defamation lawsuit filed by the father and grandfather of teenager Kiely Rodni who disappeared and was tragically found un-alived in 2022 against on-line content creator/musician Ryan Upchurch resulting in a verdict following jury trial in the amount of $17.5 million. The rhetorical question is asked as to whether Upchurch will appeal.

To view the jury verdict form, Link to our YT channel:

https://www.youtube.com/@KathysIndieZoNe/postsEverything here represents the pure opinion, commentary, speculation and rhetorical questions per the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which states at Amendment I:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.It is codified within Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act, which provides that fair use of a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research)” is not an infringement of copyright.

#KielyRodni

#DanielRodni

#DavidRobertson

#FreeSpeech

#DefamationCase