The Moscow Murders and More

From the archives: 3-28-23





We've heard numerous times now about Bryan Kohberger and his newfound glory in God. Beyond the fact that he had been meeting with a pastor and exploring his faith however, we didn't know much else.


In this episode, we are learning more about his visits to the pastor from the man who runs the ministry who is in charge of providing services to the incarcerated in Idaho.

(commercial at 7:44)

to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Brian Kohberger pastor tells how he prays with the quadruple murderer | Daily Mail Online

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

According to the lawyer representing Bryan Kohberger in Pennsylvania, he intitally waived his right to a lawyer in the direct aftermath of his arrest. After speaking with the police at the local police station for roughly 15 minutes, he changed his mind and evoked his right to counsel.


In this episode, we hear from the man representing Bryan Kohberger and get a little more context about the the arrest.


(commercial at 7:52)

to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Lawyer: Bryan Kohberger Initially Agreed To Talk to Police (lawandcrime.com)

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger, Case No. CR01-24-31665, the defense submitted a reply challenging the State’s opposition to its motion to continue the trial. Kohberger’s legal team argues that the prosecution’s objection ignores the complex and voluminous nature of discovery materials still being reviewed, which include thousands of pages of documents, hours of surveillance footage, and extensive forensic data. The defense emphasizes that proceeding without adequate time to evaluate this evidence would compromise Kohberger’s constitutional right to a fair trial and effective assistance of counsel.


Additionally, the reply underscores that this is a capital case with unique legal and investigative demands, requiring more preparation time than the prosecution acknowledges. The defense contends that rushing the proceedings would not serve justice and that the need for a continuance is both reasonable and necessary given the gravity of the charges and the scope of the case. They urge the court to grant the motion and reject the State’s assertion that further delay is unwarranted.













to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

061625+Defendants+Reply+to+the+States+Opposition+to+Defendants+Motion+to+Continue.pdf

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger, Case No. CR01-24-31665, the defense submitted a reply challenging the State’s opposition to its motion to continue the trial. Kohberger’s legal team argues that the prosecution’s objection ignores the complex and voluminous nature of discovery materials still being reviewed, which include thousands of pages of documents, hours of surveillance footage, and extensive forensic data. The defense emphasizes that proceeding without adequate time to evaluate this evidence would compromise Kohberger’s constitutional right to a fair trial and effective assistance of counsel.


Additionally, the reply underscores that this is a capital case with unique legal and investigative demands, requiring more preparation time than the prosecution acknowledges. The defense contends that rushing the proceedings would not serve justice and that the need for a continuance is both reasonable and necessary given the gravity of the charges and the scope of the case. They urge the court to grant the motion and reject the State’s assertion that further delay is unwarranted.













to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

061625+Defendants+Reply+to+the+States+Opposition+to+Defendants+Motion+to+Continue.pdf


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In United States v. Combs, the Government responds to the defendant’s motion to strike portions of Mr. Mescudi’s testimony. The defendant contends that certain parts of Mescudi’s testimony should be excluded from the trial, asserting that they are irrelevant or prejudicial. The Government argues that Mescudi’s testimony is both relevant and integral to its case, and it should not be excluded. They emphasize that Mescudi's statements provide important context and details that directly relate to the charges and help to establish key aspects of the prosecution’s narrative.


Additionally, the Government identifies disputed evidentiary issues regarding the upcoming testimony of Deonte Nash and Mia. The defense has raised objections about the admissibility of certain aspects of their testimonies, questioning their relevance and the potential for bias. The Government contends that both witnesses are critical to the case and their testimonies should be allowed to stand, as they provide essential evidence regarding the defendant’s actions. The Government’s position is that any objections to their testimony should be rejected, as it aligns with the facts and is necessary for proving the charges.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.406.0.pdf

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In United States v. Combs, the Government responds to the defendant’s motion to strike portions of Mr. Mescudi’s testimony. The defendant contends that certain parts of Mescudi’s testimony should be excluded from the trial, asserting that they are irrelevant or prejudicial. The Government argues that Mescudi’s testimony is both relevant and integral to its case, and it should not be excluded. They emphasize that Mescudi's statements provide important context and details that directly relate to the charges and help to establish key aspects of the prosecution’s narrative.


Additionally, the Government identifies disputed evidentiary issues regarding the upcoming testimony of Deonte Nash and Mia. The defense has raised objections about the admissibility of certain aspects of their testimonies, questioning their relevance and the potential for bias. The Government contends that both witnesses are critical to the case and their testimonies should be allowed to stand, as they provide essential evidence regarding the defendant’s actions. The Government’s position is that any objections to their testimony should be rejected, as it aligns with the facts and is necessary for proving the charges.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.406.0.pdf

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In United States v. Combs, the Government writes to address contested evidentiary matters related to the testimony of Mia and Frank Piazza, as well as the text messages the prosecution intends to admit regarding the summary charts. The defense has raised objections concerning the admissibility of Mia’s continued testimony, particularly regarding her interactions with law enforcement and any potential influence on her statements. Additionally, Frank Piazza's testimony has been challenged on the grounds of relevance and whether it sufficiently supports the Government’s case. The defense argues that Piazza’s statements should be excluded due to their alleged lack of direct connection to the charges.

The Government also seeks to admit certain text messages as evidence, which the defense opposes, citing concerns about the authenticity and relevance of the communications. These messages are intended to support summary charts that outline financial transactions and communication patterns relevant to the case. The defense contends that the charts and associated texts lack sufficient context and may unfairly prejudice the jury. In response, the Government argues that the texts and charts are vital for clarifying key points in the case and should be admitted as they provide essential context for understanding the defendant’s actions.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.407.0.pdf

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Sara Rivers, formerly known as Sara Stokes from MTV’s Making the Band 2 and a member of Da Band, filed a $60 million lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, battery, psychological abuse, and professional sabotage. Rivers claims that Combs subjected her to degrading treatment throughout her time on the reality series and beyond, including groping her without consent, making sexually explicit comments, and mocking her bulimia. She further alleges that Combs controlled contestants' food, sleep, and movement, orchestrated humiliating stunts like the infamous "cheesecake walk," and forced her into uncompensated labor under exploitative conditions. According to the complaint, Rivers was made to sleep in exposed, unsafe quarters with male co-stars and denied basic dignity and protection.


The lawsuit names more than two dozen other parties, including executives at Bad Boy, Universal Music Group, MTV, and even Combs's mother, asserting that they either enabled or failed to intervene in the abuse. Rivers accuses Combs of deliberately dismantling Da Band to assert dominance and retain control of her earnings, effectively sabotaging her career. She asserts that this behavior was not isolated but part of a systemic pattern of exploitation and intimidation that targeted young, vulnerable performers. Combs’s legal team has dismissed the suit as meritless and opportunistic, noting it was filed just before the deadline under the New York City Gender-Motivated Violence Act. The case joins a growing list of lawsuits and criminal investigations currently surrounding Combs.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

Sara cmplt

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Sara Rivers, formerly known as Sara Stokes from MTV’s Making the Band 2 and a member of Da Band, filed a $60 million lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, battery, psychological abuse, and professional sabotage. Rivers claims that Combs subjected her to degrading treatment throughout her time on the reality series and beyond, including groping her without consent, making sexually explicit comments, and mocking her bulimia. She further alleges that Combs controlled contestants' food, sleep, and movement, orchestrated humiliating stunts like the infamous "cheesecake walk," and forced her into uncompensated labor under exploitative conditions. According to the complaint, Rivers was made to sleep in exposed, unsafe quarters with male co-stars and denied basic dignity and protection.


The lawsuit names more than two dozen other parties, including executives at Bad Boy, Universal Music Group, MTV, and even Combs's mother, asserting that they either enabled or failed to intervene in the abuse. Rivers accuses Combs of deliberately dismantling Da Band to assert dominance and retain control of her earnings, effectively sabotaging her career. She asserts that this behavior was not isolated but part of a systemic pattern of exploitation and intimidation that targeted young, vulnerable performers. Combs’s legal team has dismissed the suit as meritless and opportunistic, noting it was filed just before the deadline under the New York City Gender-Motivated Violence Act. The case joins a growing list of lawsuits and criminal investigations currently surrounding Combs.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

Sara cmplt

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On the morning of November 13th 2022 a horrifying quadruple murder took place in Moscow Idaho at a home located at 1122 King Road. Inside of that home, four young college students were busy living their lives like they did on countless weekends leading up to the that fateful morning. While they were busy living their lives, they could not know the evil that was lurking literally right outside their door.


In this episode, we take a look at where things started and where things currently stand as of today.



(commercial at 10:43)

to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

University of Idaho murders 1 year later: Where the case stands - ABC News (go.com)

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.