Lawyers representing Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of murdering four University of Idaho students in 2022, have argued that pursuing the death penalty against him violates the U.S. Constitution. In 13 new filings submitted Thursday, the defense cited both the U.S. and Idaho Constitutions in a bid to remove the death penalty as a potential sentence if Kohberger is convicted.
One of the filings stated that the process leading to Kohberger’s case has failed to properly safeguard him from being unfairly selected for the death penalty.
Kohberger faces charges of first-degree murder and burglary after allegedly breaking into an off-campus residence and fatally stabbing four students. The state has expressed its intent to seek the death penalty in the case, with the trial tentatively scheduled for June 2025.
To sentence Kohberger to death, a jury must find specific aggravating factors that make the crime more severe. Prosecutors have pointed to five factors: multiple murders, the crime occurring amid another crime (felony murder), Kohberger’s “utter disregard for human life,” his apparent propensity for murder, and the murders being “especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel.”
The defense, led by Idaho’s interim chief public defender Jay Logsdon, challenged these aggravating factors:
Multiple murders: The defense argued that the presence of multiple victims does not necessarily reflect the severity of the offender’s actions or justify the death penalty.
Felony murder: The defense contended that the burglary was simply a means to commit the murder, making it an inherent part of the crime, not an additional aggravating factor.
Utter disregard, future dangerousness, and cruelty: The defense argued these claims were too vague and lacked clear criteria for justifying the death penalty.
Additionally, in six other motions, the defense made the following points to seek the removal of the death penalty:
The absence of a “neutral fact finder,” such as a grand jury, allows prosecutors too much discretion in seeking the death penalty.
The execution methods in Idaho — lethal injection or firing squad — are inhumane and violate constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment.
Idaho’s death penalty system lacks clear guidelines, leading to arbitrary decisions that violate rights to fair treatment.
The death penalty is outdated and inconsistent with modern standards of decency, violating international treaties.
The state’s requirement for a speedy trial makes it difficult for Kohberger’s defense team to properly prepare for a death penalty case.
The defense also requested that the prosecution disclose any additional non-legal aggravating factors in advance and prove those factors beyond a reasonable doubt. They further proposed dividing the trial into three phases, including an “eligibility phase” to determine if Kohberger is eligible for the death penalty before moving on to sentencing.
The state has until October 10 to respond, with the next hearing set for November 7.
