Kathy's InDieZoNe

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 an update concerning the appellate court granting the State of Indiana a "final" (second) extension of time to respond to Mr. Allen's Appellate Brief and discuss forthcoming anticipated events.

LINK to YT Channel Discussed In this podcast episode:

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 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, 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. Here we discuss Day 1 (Feb. 23) per the court minutes of the four day jury trial.

LINK to our prior podcast on Federal Diversity of Citizenship Jurisdiction in the Idaho4 Defamation Case:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NcoGyUvx-c&t=107s

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.

#RebeccaScofield

#AshleyGuillard

#Idaho4

#Defamation

#BryanKohberger

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation per the First Amendment quoting and citing to it while discussing a forthcoming United States Supreme Court proceeding that could change the legal standard for those who wish to set aside plea deals revisiting the Supreme Court's 2019 precedent in Garza v. Idaho.

The rhetorical question is also discussed raising pure opinions, comments and speculation as to whether this might change the legal climate should Mr. Kohberger the defendant in Idaho v. Kohberger seek at some point in future to challenge his appeal waiver set forth within his plea agreement. Note: There is no indication Mr. Kohberger has sought/will seek to challenge his plea deal as of the time of the recording of this presentation.

LINK to SCOTUS Oral Argument Page: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/oral_arguments.aspx

LINK to Hunter vs. United States SCOTUS case file: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24-1063.html

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 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 multiple developments in the proceedings that have recently occurred posing the rhetorical question: Will Mr. Allen's conviction and sentence be reversed outright and alternatively will he be provided a "Franks" hearing challenging the warrant affidavit:

Here we report that the State of Indiana has filed a 2nd Motion for Extension of Time to respond to Mr. Allen's appellate brief up to and including Monday, March 30, 2026. Will it be granted?

LINK to our YT channel discussed in this episode: 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 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.

#DelphiAppeal

#JudgeGull

#RichardAllen

#AbbyandLibby

Here, in raising the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, we provide pure opinions, commentary, speculation and ask rhetorical questions as to "why" is this high-profile highly-sealed criminal case still hidden from the public domain eight months after the sole person ever arrested was sent to prison?

Go here for a link to the Ada County Courts Notice relative to unsealing of court documents once approved in the long-closed high-profile criminal case of Idaho v. Kohberger:

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

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.

Everything here is pure opinion per Amend. I, U.S. Constitution and is provided for discussion and educational purposes only.Mr. Kohberger is presumed innocent of the five first degree felonies he has been charged with until or unless he (1) pleads guilty or (2) is adjudicated guilty in a court of law

#Idaho4

#BryanKohberger

#FirstAmendment

Here we provide pure opinions, comments, and speculation concerning how a member of the public could apply to have a federal court proceeding participating in the "Cameras in the Courtroom pilot program" broadcast live to the general public.

Currently, the Western (but not Eastern) District of Washington where the high profile civil case styled as Goncalves et al. v. WSU is being prosecuted is one of only 3 federal courts in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal participating in this pilot program.

Link to info/form RE: Cameras in the (federal) courtroom:

https://www.wawd.uscourts.gov/attorneys/cameras-in-the-courtroom/procedures

Link to prior federal proceedings recorded as part of the Cameras in the Courtroom pilot program:

https://www.uscourts.gov/court-records/access-court-proceedings/remote-public-access-proceedings/cameras-courts

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.

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.

Link to District of Idaho website listing Scofield v. Guillard as "a go" here:

https://ecf.idd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/PublicCalendar.pl?192540442786365-L_967_0-1

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.

Here, per the First Amendment we provide pure opinions, speculations, comments and pose rhetorical questions concerning the Plaintiffs' February 20, 2026 Declaration filed in Opposition to the Defense's Motion for Change of Venue. In this document, certain of Plaintiffs' trial witnesses are discussed, including the Kohberger family and Mr. Kohberger's former professor at Pennsylvania's DeSales University, and much more, in further support of Plaintiff's position this lawsuit should not be transferred out of the Western District of Washington as WSU has asserted.

Link to YT channel where pages from this declaration are located for the public's further consideration :    / @kathysindiezone  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 #WashingtonStateUniversity #BryanKohberger #FirstAmendment #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.

Per the federal docket, it appears Defense missed an important court-ordered deadline to respond to documents filed by Plaintiff from the Idaho v. Kohberger criminal case. The court-ordered response was to a Plaintiff filing on February 18, 2026 has resulted in the court setting a schedule for a response and a reply thereto on "the courthouse steps" just before the federal jury trial set to commence on Tuesday, February 24, 2026.

LINK to our prior podcast on Federal Diversity of Citizenship Jurisdiction in the Idaho4 Defamation Case:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NcoGyUvx-c&t=107s

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.

#RebeccaScofield

#AshleyGuillard

#Idaho4

#Defamation

#BryanKohberger

Here, per the First Amendment we provide pure opinions, speculations, comments and pose rhetorical questions concerning the Plaintiffs' February 20, 2026 Opposition to the Defense's Motion for Change of Venue.

Link to YT channel discussed herein:

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 #WashingtonStateUniversity #BryanKohberger #FirstAmendment #FreeSpeech