Kathy's InDieZoNe

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. 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.

#Idaho4

#WashingtonStateUniversity

#TitleIX

Here, we provided opinions, commentary and speculation regarding the appeal styled as Richard Allen v. State of Indiana discussing the status of the same. This is the high profile "Delphi case" where Appellant/Allen is seeking a new trial or in the alternative remanding to the trial court for a "Franks" hearing. According to the docket Mr. Allen has filed his Reply Brief, closing the briefings, and also filed a Motion for Oral Argument.

We provide an update on the status of the request for oral argument served April 27, 2026 and a link to where the public may use a search engine to determine if/when oral argument is granted and watch future live proceedings here:

https://mycourts.in.gov/arguments/default.aspxThe Allen v. Indiana complete docket is available for the public's review free of charge here: https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase/#...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.

#RichardAllen

#DelphiAppeal

#FirstAmendment

#FreeSpeech

Here we provide pure opinions, thoughts, speculation and proffer rhetorical questions based on the First Amendment regarding the most important evidence the state brought forward in the case against Mr. Kohberger at a time when many are discussing the sheath's chain of custody, and how facts pinpointed to the record shows defense did not intend to challenge sheath chain of custody in our opinion at trial. Everything here represents the host's pure opinions and commentary pursuant to Amend. I, U.S. Constitution (freedom of speech and the press). 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. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

LINK: 3 Days in Moscow PlayList RE Sheath COC discussed in this episode of Idaho v Kohberger---) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbLUtgSDXdFM6CQsNfOn5dMMBMIKOt1HF

Here, we provided opinions, commentary and speculation regarding the settlement of the federal lawsuit filed by Hollywood actress Blake Lively's lawsuit against her former co-star/director Justin Baldoni and certain film production, distribution and promotion companies associated with the Hollywood film "It Ends With Us." Trial was scheduled to commence on May 18, 2026. However according to a settlement agreement entered into by Plaintiff Lively and Defendant Baldoni and the other defendants, Lively did not release certain aspects of her claims. A ruling is pending from the court.

To review the settlement agreement, go here:

https://www.youtube.com/@KathysIndieZoNe/posts

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.

#JustinBaldoni

#BlakeLively

#ItEndsWithUs

#FreeSpeech

Here, we provided opinions, commentary and speculation regarding the court case filed in a Florida State court this date March 31, 2026 of the celebrity/world famous professional golfer Tiger Woods on Jupiter Island, Martin County, Florida. This follows a prior May 2017 DUI arrest in Palm Beach County, Florida. A not-guilty plea has been entered by Mr. Woods who took to X/Twitter asking for "privacy" during this time.

A review of the court records reveals that two citizens have written to the court and urging that no celebrity justice should be afforded here and explain why.

Public records discussed here from Florida v. Woods, LINK:

https://www.youtube.com/post/Ugkxc5bw-ztasGKypabP0DcRYcQ6fFVkBr77Everything 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.

#TigerWoods

#FloridavWoods

#DUI

#FirstAmendment

#FreeSpeech

#PetitionGovtGrievances

Here, we discuss and opine for criticism, commentary, news reporting and educational/research purposes the purpose of our independent reporting of the investigation into the crimes at 1122 King Rd. & the Idaho v Kohberger highly sealed criminal case that has been closed for nearly a year.  On May 15, 2025, the date of the final pre-trial conference, Judge Hippler issued orders regarding a "leak" and potential violation of the court's non-dissemination order and in follow-up to our May 4, 2026 presentation relative to the same. LINK to this podcast episode:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bYLTIjNTiY

We now learn from Kevin Fixler of the Idaho Statesman that an ongoing investigation into the matter is proceeding. 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#Idaho4

#BryanKohberger

#KevinFixler

#JudgeHippler

Here we discuss the answers to two recent quizzes on cases we follow testing our knowledge of the facts of those cases.

LINK to our YT channel/community page: https://www.youtube.com/@KathysIndieZoNe/post

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. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

#Idaho4

#EWUMedia

#FreeSpeech

#FreePress

Here we provide pure comments, opinions and speculations based on the First Amendment as to the "DelphI Appeal" as the appellate proceeding styled as Richard Allen vs. State of Indiana has been referred to. In doing so, we provide developments in the proceedings that have recently occurred posing the rhetorical question: Will Mr. Allen's conviction and sentence be reversed outright or alternatively will he be provided a "Franks" hearing challenging the warrant affidavit, and if so will Judge Frances Gull preside over the matter following any remand.

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. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠#RichardAllen⁠ ⁠#Delphi⁠ ⁠#DelphiAppeal⁠ First Amendment, US ConstitutionFourthAmendment, US Constitution Under the Constitution of the United States, all persons charged with a crime are considered not guilty until or unless they (1) plead guilty or are (2) adjudicated guilty in a court of law.

Here we provide pure opinions, commentary and speculation concerning the state's demand for alibi/discovery served mid-March 2026 upon Mr. Wondra in this high profile criminal case which is currently proceeding in the State of Idaho concerning the tragic disappearance of Michael Vaughn. LINK to Idaho v Wondra docket available to the public free of charge:https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR38-25-1295-26.html

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

#MichaelVaughn

#IdahovWondra

#AlibiDefense

#FreeSpeech

Idaho v. Kohberger was a high-profile, highly-sealed criminal case which proceeded in state court for over 2.5 years until July 2025 when Mr. Kohberger to the surprise of many agreed to plead guilty to all charges brought by a criminal indictment returned by an Idaho grand jury. More than eight months after the closure of the criminal proceedings, the case remains largely under seal.A lawsuit has been filed by EWU Media LLC who has alleged the City of Moscow/Moscow Police Dept. wrongfully withheld information from the Kohberger investigation records after they filed public records requests into the crimes at 1122 King Road. A hearing is scheduled in May on EWU's petition. Here we discuss an amended order entered by Judge Megan E. Marshall concerning the case.

This is a current status of the case with a discussion of the Reply filed by EWU to the Response submitted by Moscow, effectively closing the briefings.

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.