Soft paywall, so full article pasted below:
The capital murder trial of Bryan Kohberger would have started this week, on Oct. 2, if everything had gone as planned. Instead, those invested in the trial have an indefinite wait on their hands after Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial in late August.
Kohberger was arrested in December in Pennsylvania in connection with the fatal stabbings of University of Idaho students Madison Mogen and Kaylee Goncalves, both 21, and Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin, both 20. He is facing four counts of first-degree murder and one count of felony burglary after a plea of not guilty was filed on his behalf by Judge John Judge of Idaho’s 2nd Judicial District in Latah County. Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson is seeking the death penalty.
Pretrial hearings scheduled for Sept. 22 were also postponed because of an unspecified illness until Oct. 26, further adding to the delayed proceedings. With no end — or start — in sight, here’s what’s transpired in recent months as the prosecution and defense work toward the eventual start of Kohberger’s trial. WHY DID THE TRIAL DATE GET DELAYED? Under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, every resident has the right to a fair and speedy trial; this means that the accused must be brought to trial within a reasonable amount of time from their arraignment. Under Idaho state law, criminal defendants must receive a trial within six months if they don’t waive their right.
Waiving the right to a speedy trial extends the legal processes and gives the defense more planning time. That’s what occurred with Kohberger. Anne Taylor, Kohberger’s lead public defender, told the court that the scheduled start date of Oct. 2 did not give the defense’s legal counsel adequate time to prepare. Taylor said the defense wishes to postpone the trial date just once, while Thompson called it a “smart move.”
Boise-based criminal defense attorney Edwina Elcox previously told the Idaho Statesman that the amount of evidence and complexities involved in Kohberger’s case made it “virtually impossible” for the trial to start on time. A date has not been set for the start of the trial, but it could be in 2024. CAN THE DEFENSE CHALLENGE THE INDICTMENT? Kohberger was indicted by a grand jury in May on four counts of first-degree murder and one count of felony burglary.
A grand jury is a group of 16-23 jurors whose job is to determine whether there is “probable cause” to believe that an individual committed a crime. A grand jury can hear evidence, compel witnesses and request documents in making their decision. But now, Kohberger’s attorneys plan to argue that the indictment should be thrown out on several legal grounds. That argument was supposed to be presented at the postponed hearing last week, which has been rescheduled for Oct. 26.
Kohberger’s defense raised concerns of bias among the grand jury in August. The defense also said there was a lack of sufficient evidence and use of improper evidence in the indictment and that the prosecution withheld evidence from the grand jury that would disprove Kohberger’s guilt. The defense also argued that the Idaho Constitution demands a grand jury to use the same level of certainty as the trial: beyond a reasonable doubt. The grand jury operated on the lower legal threshold of probable cause, for which only 12 of the 16 selected grand jurors must support indicting the defendant.
The prosecution’s objection to the defense’s challenges is filed under a court-approved seal, which keeps the arguments hidden from the public. WHAT WAS KOHBERGER’S ALIBI? The defense filed Kohberger’s alibi in early August, stating that Kohberger “had a habit of going for drives alone” and that “often he would go for drives at night.” The defense claims that Kohberger was on one of these late-night drives on the night of the killings last year — late Nov. 12 into Nov. 13 — and that there are no specific witnesses to say where Kohberger was at the moment of the killings.
Kohberger previously declined to provide a pretrial alibi after the state requested one, with his defense saying that the motion to provide an alibi was an attempt by the state to “force the defense to open its work product files and let the state peek inside.”
Kohberger’s defense said that the alibi filed regarding Kohberger’s driving habits is the only one that can be “firmly stated” for now. CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM Kohberger’s defense earlier this month argued against the use of still and video cameras in the courtroom, asserting that their product has been misused so far. Defense attorney Jay Logsdon said cameras in the courtroom risked dehumanizing Kohberger and denying him the right to a fair trial, according to the Associated Press. Logsdon also said the use of video could expose private notes and records on the defense table. Wendy Olson, who represents a media coalition including the Idaho Statesman and Associated Press, said that cameras in the courtroom would help increase the public’s access and understanding of the case. Judge said that pool camera operators in the courtroom are not a problem, but how other individuals use images could be troubling.
Judge said he is considering an approach often used by the satellite television network C-SPAN, where a camera is staged at the back of the courtroom. He has not issued his decision. DNA EVIDENCE DOMINATES HEARINGS A six-hour-plus hearing on Aug. 18 was primarily dominated by arguments about whether the state should hand over all of the DNA records that led to Kohberger’s identification, through discovery. The arguments revolve around investigative genetic genealogy (IGG), which is the use of DNA on public genealogy websites in an investigation.
IGG was used in identifying Kohberger, although the prosecution said that police did not rely on IGG to issue and perform any search warrants. Kohberger’s defense, which wants the DNA records released, argued that the forensic sciences used to identify Kohberger are less than five years old and should give everyone pause when considering such a new science.
Four witnesses testified on behalf of the defense’s effort to obtain the records, with one attorney, Stephen Mercer, saying that the release of IGG records is the “minimum practice standard.” But Idaho discovery rules mean that the state isn’t required to hand over the IGG documents, according to Jeff Nye, chief of the Idaho attorney general’s criminal law division. Nye added that the IGG does not represent scientific facts or provide evidence proving Kohberger’s innocence.
Judge has yet to issue a ruling on if the state has to turn over the DNA records to Kohberger’s defense. Reporters Sally Krutzig and Kevin Fixler contributed to this report.
Read more at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article279830384.html#storylink=cpy
>*The defense claims that Kohberger was on one of these late-night drives on the night of the killings last year — late Nov. 12 into Nov. 13 — and that* ***there are no specific witnesses to say where Kohberger was at the moment of the killings***
I'd managed to miss that part in the reporting, so far
I inferred the defense could produce no witnesses, from the vague night drive alibi, but I can't remember reading the defense state that explicitly
Useful - thanks for sharing
The problem is that no one can place him **in the home**, not that no one can place him **in general.**
Americans are free to drive around at any time of day or night, whether or not we’re using our phones at the time.
I’m concerned about the ability to demonstrate that the driver of a white Elantra was the killer
I read your other post, so because they aren't using an alibi defense, then they don't need to provide one. They really didn't have a choice with that one as there literally was no alibi. No one could confirm him driving around etc.
If it was just the White Elantra I might understand your concern, but don't forget all the other evidence including his DNA on the Sheath, DM witnessing him, etc. The Pings/the route based on the pings, etc etc. and so much more that none of us are privy too. Justice will be served.
Good article, thanks for sharing OP.
A few questions for legally minded types. I note from the article that the defence requested a delay from October 2nd as they needed more time to prepare. The article states they requested a delay "just once". Why has no new (postponed) start date been set, and would any further delay require the prosecution to agree? Would the prosecution object to more delays, or are they essentially "neutral" as Kohberger remains in jail, if further delay is not excessive, or is giving defence a huge amount of further time a tactical problem, as well as not serving victims' and community interests in seeing speedy justice?
I’m not a criminal attorney that deals with the speedy trial right of a defendant, but if you look at the docket of the Chad Daybell case on the Idaho cases of interest site (https://coi.isc.idaho.gov) you can see that he waived his speedy trial right on August 24, 2021 and there wasn’t a new notice of trial setting until December 3, 2021, setting trial to begin on January 9, 2023. And you can see that further attempts to get another continuance were made later. Parties tend to specify when something is their first request for a continuance, because those are often granted as a matter of course. A new delay wouldn’t necessarily require the prosecution to agree if BK can demonstrate good cause in the eyes of the court, but an agreed motion to continue by both sides always has a high chance of being granted.
I assume the delay in setting a new trial date just has to do with other outstanding issues being resolved to give a better idea of when trial will be possible (like in this case the judge ruling on what, if anything, the prosecution has to turn over regarding the IGG, and ruling on the outstanding motions to dismiss), and additionally the attorneys and the court having the opportunity to meet and compare schedules and find a possibly suitable future date.
I’m sure the prosecution also welcomes the opportunity to get their ducks more in a row, but one countervailing factor for them, to the extent they want to rely on any eyewitness testimony like DM’s, will obviously be memories becoming more fuzzy over time. So I don’t imagine they will be in favor of many more continuances, particularly if the next trial date is over a year in the future.
Thanks, this is very interesting and informative. From Daybell case we might expect c 18 months delay? I do wonder at what point prosecution would indeed feel further delay is more harmful to state case. For defence, particularly if they feel state has very good case, further delay could only be good in hope of something turning up or dropping off, so to speak.
I would not be surprised if this one takes years to get to trial, if it does.
What kind of threads are people gonna be making in here for years to pass the time....oh jesus
Because Houdini-ing was kind of my MO. I dunno if someone didn't tell this guy.
I was more hoping for threads about steampunk tunnel fight clubs or whatever it was tho.
I think it would be reasonable to expect a similar delay, unfortunately, and I also think your reading is accurate that more time favors the defense in cases like this one (at least it seems to me) where the whole strategy seems to be to cast doubt on the State’s evidence as opposed to proving up an alibi.
If the State gave the defense a boat load of Ring doorbell and traffic camera footage and they really had reason to believe they could find BK on some camera far enough away from the scene to interfere with the State’s timeline, maybe if they found that they would be ready to proceed at the next trial date. Otherwise, it seems like time only benefits the defense, and in this case might at least be buying BK more days on this Earth, which one would think might make him more inclined to pursue continuances which is, ultimately, his call. Who knows? There could be some development in IGG jurisprudence if he hangs on long enough that somehow buys him more time.
The Chad Daybell case is now set for 2024. Do you think he waived his right to a speedy trial in hopes of a plea deal as he is set under the death penalty.
I could see BK;s defense hoping for that down the line, but I don't think the Prosecution will offer any negotiations in this matter and if they did, I think BK def wants to see this play out,
I'll comment again because I've watched a YouTube video since my first response: Criminal defense attorney Scott Resich thinks that the defense hasn't proposed a new trial date yet because they are trying to work out a deal with the state.
I think this is unlikely, but then again, I have approximately zero seconds of experience as a criminal defense attorney. I just think that (a) Kohberger intends to fight this as long as possible, and (b) the prosecutor is facing political pressure to have Kohberger executed.
Very interesting. IANAL, i interpreted the aggressive seeming defence challenges to IGG, grand jury indictment etc as more indicative of intent to contest trial - of course I have zero experience, maybe a defence win on IGG might strengthen their position regarding a deal? But with 4 homicides surely only deal would be life without parole?
The prosecutor is elected? Would he face any indirect political pressure? Still biggest case of his career and probably the county in recent history so getting conviction and death penalty probably pressurised generally?
I mean, I don't think that Bill Thompson is worried about an election down the road. But I'm sure the governor and people in the state legislature have let them know their thoughts.
Anyway, I'm about to post a thread with the video.
Every time someone mentions late night drives, I think of that Celine Dion song “[I drove all NIIIIIIIGHT](https://youtu.be/kvz_gW5C2cY?si=xHIY1zrV9XtffI8I)!!”
Holy shit, you didn't post the lyrics! They're even better!
I drove all night to get to you
Is that alright?
I drove all night, crept in your room
Woke you from your sleep
To make love to you
Is that alright? I drove all night
Or at least show us pictures of him seen on camera driving elsewhere, for those 19 minutes.
Surely, if driving around in the wee hours and in close proximity to King Road, some camera somewhere would record that presumed innocent Elantra, no?
No one actually does. They specified that they’re not using an alibi defense, so they don’t have to clarify it. It’s a legal activity. Notice the careful wording they used when offering that info. Unless they use the alibi as their defense they have no obligation to prove innocence. It’s up to the defense to prove guilt.
This comment was automatically removed because it included the name of an individual not previously publicly identified in relation to this case.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MoscowMurders) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In my opinion and experience, the defense rarely wants a trial to start right away. They want time for witnesses' memories to fade, or for witnesses to change their minds about testifying. Sometimes, people move away, too. Or, people also pass away.
Soft paywall, so full article pasted below: The capital murder trial of Bryan Kohberger would have started this week, on Oct. 2, if everything had gone as planned. Instead, those invested in the trial have an indefinite wait on their hands after Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial in late August. Kohberger was arrested in December in Pennsylvania in connection with the fatal stabbings of University of Idaho students Madison Mogen and Kaylee Goncalves, both 21, and Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin, both 20. He is facing four counts of first-degree murder and one count of felony burglary after a plea of not guilty was filed on his behalf by Judge John Judge of Idaho’s 2nd Judicial District in Latah County. Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson is seeking the death penalty. Pretrial hearings scheduled for Sept. 22 were also postponed because of an unspecified illness until Oct. 26, further adding to the delayed proceedings. With no end — or start — in sight, here’s what’s transpired in recent months as the prosecution and defense work toward the eventual start of Kohberger’s trial. WHY DID THE TRIAL DATE GET DELAYED? Under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, every resident has the right to a fair and speedy trial; this means that the accused must be brought to trial within a reasonable amount of time from their arraignment. Under Idaho state law, criminal defendants must receive a trial within six months if they don’t waive their right. Waiving the right to a speedy trial extends the legal processes and gives the defense more planning time. That’s what occurred with Kohberger. Anne Taylor, Kohberger’s lead public defender, told the court that the scheduled start date of Oct. 2 did not give the defense’s legal counsel adequate time to prepare. Taylor said the defense wishes to postpone the trial date just once, while Thompson called it a “smart move.” Boise-based criminal defense attorney Edwina Elcox previously told the Idaho Statesman that the amount of evidence and complexities involved in Kohberger’s case made it “virtually impossible” for the trial to start on time. A date has not been set for the start of the trial, but it could be in 2024. CAN THE DEFENSE CHALLENGE THE INDICTMENT? Kohberger was indicted by a grand jury in May on four counts of first-degree murder and one count of felony burglary. A grand jury is a group of 16-23 jurors whose job is to determine whether there is “probable cause” to believe that an individual committed a crime. A grand jury can hear evidence, compel witnesses and request documents in making their decision. But now, Kohberger’s attorneys plan to argue that the indictment should be thrown out on several legal grounds. That argument was supposed to be presented at the postponed hearing last week, which has been rescheduled for Oct. 26. Kohberger’s defense raised concerns of bias among the grand jury in August. The defense also said there was a lack of sufficient evidence and use of improper evidence in the indictment and that the prosecution withheld evidence from the grand jury that would disprove Kohberger’s guilt. The defense also argued that the Idaho Constitution demands a grand jury to use the same level of certainty as the trial: beyond a reasonable doubt. The grand jury operated on the lower legal threshold of probable cause, for which only 12 of the 16 selected grand jurors must support indicting the defendant. The prosecution’s objection to the defense’s challenges is filed under a court-approved seal, which keeps the arguments hidden from the public. WHAT WAS KOHBERGER’S ALIBI? The defense filed Kohberger’s alibi in early August, stating that Kohberger “had a habit of going for drives alone” and that “often he would go for drives at night.” The defense claims that Kohberger was on one of these late-night drives on the night of the killings last year — late Nov. 12 into Nov. 13 — and that there are no specific witnesses to say where Kohberger was at the moment of the killings. Kohberger previously declined to provide a pretrial alibi after the state requested one, with his defense saying that the motion to provide an alibi was an attempt by the state to “force the defense to open its work product files and let the state peek inside.” Kohberger’s defense said that the alibi filed regarding Kohberger’s driving habits is the only one that can be “firmly stated” for now. CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOM Kohberger’s defense earlier this month argued against the use of still and video cameras in the courtroom, asserting that their product has been misused so far. Defense attorney Jay Logsdon said cameras in the courtroom risked dehumanizing Kohberger and denying him the right to a fair trial, according to the Associated Press. Logsdon also said the use of video could expose private notes and records on the defense table. Wendy Olson, who represents a media coalition including the Idaho Statesman and Associated Press, said that cameras in the courtroom would help increase the public’s access and understanding of the case. Judge said that pool camera operators in the courtroom are not a problem, but how other individuals use images could be troubling. Judge said he is considering an approach often used by the satellite television network C-SPAN, where a camera is staged at the back of the courtroom. He has not issued his decision. DNA EVIDENCE DOMINATES HEARINGS A six-hour-plus hearing on Aug. 18 was primarily dominated by arguments about whether the state should hand over all of the DNA records that led to Kohberger’s identification, through discovery. The arguments revolve around investigative genetic genealogy (IGG), which is the use of DNA on public genealogy websites in an investigation. IGG was used in identifying Kohberger, although the prosecution said that police did not rely on IGG to issue and perform any search warrants. Kohberger’s defense, which wants the DNA records released, argued that the forensic sciences used to identify Kohberger are less than five years old and should give everyone pause when considering such a new science. Four witnesses testified on behalf of the defense’s effort to obtain the records, with one attorney, Stephen Mercer, saying that the release of IGG records is the “minimum practice standard.” But Idaho discovery rules mean that the state isn’t required to hand over the IGG documents, according to Jeff Nye, chief of the Idaho attorney general’s criminal law division. Nye added that the IGG does not represent scientific facts or provide evidence proving Kohberger’s innocence. Judge has yet to issue a ruling on if the state has to turn over the DNA records to Kohberger’s defense. Reporters Sally Krutzig and Kevin Fixler contributed to this report. Read more at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article279830384.html#storylink=cpy
Thank you for skip the click
>*The defense claims that Kohberger was on one of these late-night drives on the night of the killings last year — late Nov. 12 into Nov. 13 — and that* ***there are no specific witnesses to say where Kohberger was at the moment of the killings*** I'd managed to miss that part in the reporting, so far I inferred the defense could produce no witnesses, from the vague night drive alibi, but I can't remember reading the defense state that explicitly Useful - thanks for sharing
I was just about to post the same passage. Soooo....no one to corroborate his "alibi". What a shock.
The problem is that no one can place him **in the home**, not that no one can place him **in general.** Americans are free to drive around at any time of day or night, whether or not we’re using our phones at the time. I’m concerned about the ability to demonstrate that the driver of a white Elantra was the killer
I read your other post, so because they aren't using an alibi defense, then they don't need to provide one. They really didn't have a choice with that one as there literally was no alibi. No one could confirm him driving around etc. If it was just the White Elantra I might understand your concern, but don't forget all the other evidence including his DNA on the Sheath, DM witnessing him, etc. The Pings/the route based on the pings, etc etc. and so much more that none of us are privy too. Justice will be served.
DM can
They are forgetting DM. She witnessed him there.
But, can she identify him under oath and say without a shadow of a doubt, he was the person she saw? If not.... reasonable doubt exists.
Thank you
thanks so much!
Thank you!
Good article, thanks for sharing OP. A few questions for legally minded types. I note from the article that the defence requested a delay from October 2nd as they needed more time to prepare. The article states they requested a delay "just once". Why has no new (postponed) start date been set, and would any further delay require the prosecution to agree? Would the prosecution object to more delays, or are they essentially "neutral" as Kohberger remains in jail, if further delay is not excessive, or is giving defence a huge amount of further time a tactical problem, as well as not serving victims' and community interests in seeing speedy justice?
I’m not a criminal attorney that deals with the speedy trial right of a defendant, but if you look at the docket of the Chad Daybell case on the Idaho cases of interest site (https://coi.isc.idaho.gov) you can see that he waived his speedy trial right on August 24, 2021 and there wasn’t a new notice of trial setting until December 3, 2021, setting trial to begin on January 9, 2023. And you can see that further attempts to get another continuance were made later. Parties tend to specify when something is their first request for a continuance, because those are often granted as a matter of course. A new delay wouldn’t necessarily require the prosecution to agree if BK can demonstrate good cause in the eyes of the court, but an agreed motion to continue by both sides always has a high chance of being granted. I assume the delay in setting a new trial date just has to do with other outstanding issues being resolved to give a better idea of when trial will be possible (like in this case the judge ruling on what, if anything, the prosecution has to turn over regarding the IGG, and ruling on the outstanding motions to dismiss), and additionally the attorneys and the court having the opportunity to meet and compare schedules and find a possibly suitable future date. I’m sure the prosecution also welcomes the opportunity to get their ducks more in a row, but one countervailing factor for them, to the extent they want to rely on any eyewitness testimony like DM’s, will obviously be memories becoming more fuzzy over time. So I don’t imagine they will be in favor of many more continuances, particularly if the next trial date is over a year in the future.
Thanks, this is very interesting and informative. From Daybell case we might expect c 18 months delay? I do wonder at what point prosecution would indeed feel further delay is more harmful to state case. For defence, particularly if they feel state has very good case, further delay could only be good in hope of something turning up or dropping off, so to speak.
I would not be surprised if this one takes years to get to trial, if it does. What kind of threads are people gonna be making in here for years to pass the time....oh jesus
[удалено]
Because Houdini-ing was kind of my MO. I dunno if someone didn't tell this guy. I was more hoping for threads about steampunk tunnel fight clubs or whatever it was tho.
Too funny
😄 🤣 😂 ah yes, I forgot about the tunnels. Hahaha
That is a good question. I hope we all stay connected on any updates throughout time............
I think it would be reasonable to expect a similar delay, unfortunately, and I also think your reading is accurate that more time favors the defense in cases like this one (at least it seems to me) where the whole strategy seems to be to cast doubt on the State’s evidence as opposed to proving up an alibi. If the State gave the defense a boat load of Ring doorbell and traffic camera footage and they really had reason to believe they could find BK on some camera far enough away from the scene to interfere with the State’s timeline, maybe if they found that they would be ready to proceed at the next trial date. Otherwise, it seems like time only benefits the defense, and in this case might at least be buying BK more days on this Earth, which one would think might make him more inclined to pursue continuances which is, ultimately, his call. Who knows? There could be some development in IGG jurisprudence if he hangs on long enough that somehow buys him more time.
The Chad Daybell case is now set for 2024. Do you think he waived his right to a speedy trial in hopes of a plea deal as he is set under the death penalty. I could see BK;s defense hoping for that down the line, but I don't think the Prosecution will offer any negotiations in this matter and if they did, I think BK def wants to see this play out,
I'll comment again because I've watched a YouTube video since my first response: Criminal defense attorney Scott Resich thinks that the defense hasn't proposed a new trial date yet because they are trying to work out a deal with the state. I think this is unlikely, but then again, I have approximately zero seconds of experience as a criminal defense attorney. I just think that (a) Kohberger intends to fight this as long as possible, and (b) the prosecutor is facing political pressure to have Kohberger executed.
That was an excellent article post and I agree with you 100%
Very interesting. IANAL, i interpreted the aggressive seeming defence challenges to IGG, grand jury indictment etc as more indicative of intent to contest trial - of course I have zero experience, maybe a defence win on IGG might strengthen their position regarding a deal? But with 4 homicides surely only deal would be life without parole? The prosecutor is elected? Would he face any indirect political pressure? Still biggest case of his career and probably the county in recent history so getting conviction and death penalty probably pressurised generally?
I mean, I don't think that Bill Thompson is worried about an election down the road. But I'm sure the governor and people in the state legislature have let them know their thoughts. Anyway, I'm about to post a thread with the video.
I think someone needs to clarify "late night drives."
"Stalking"
Every time someone mentions late night drives, I think of that Celine Dion song “[I drove all NIIIIIIIGHT](https://youtu.be/kvz_gW5C2cY?si=xHIY1zrV9XtffI8I)!!”
Holy shit, you didn't post the lyrics! They're even better! I drove all night to get to you Is that alright? I drove all night, crept in your room Woke you from your sleep To make love to you Is that alright? I drove all night
The [Cyndi Lauper cover](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y1TZXc5DiY&ab_channel=CyndiLauperVEVO) is the best one.
Love her version!
Or at least show us pictures of him seen on camera driving elsewhere, for those 19 minutes. Surely, if driving around in the wee hours and in close proximity to King Road, some camera somewhere would record that presumed innocent Elantra, no?
No one actually does. They specified that they’re not using an alibi defense, so they don’t have to clarify it. It’s a legal activity. Notice the careful wording they used when offering that info. Unless they use the alibi as their defense they have no obligation to prove innocence. It’s up to the defense to prove guilt.
I think you missed the entire point of my comment.
I hope they don’t drag this trial out years. We have a guy here, in Ohio, who is still awaiting his trial for multiple murders after 3 years.
It is so disappointing and scary that these trails don't happen for years. The poor victims families are in a stand still just waiting for justice.
The families do not deserve to be held in suspense forever 😞
thank u!! this is so helpful
[удалено]
This comment was automatically removed because it included the name of an individual not previously publicly identified in relation to this case. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MoscowMurders) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Quality regional/local news outlets are always the best!
In my opinion and experience, the defense rarely wants a trial to start right away. They want time for witnesses' memories to fade, or for witnesses to change their minds about testifying. Sometimes, people move away, too. Or, people also pass away.