As the trial of Bryan Kohberger looms closer, his legal team has introduced a surprising new argument in their attempt to spare him from the death penalty—claiming he has autism.
This unexpected development comes amid a flurry of legal filings and discussions about Idaho’s execution methods.
Legal Maneuvers and the Autism Claim
Kohberger’s defense recently filed a motion titled “To Strike the Death Penalty Re: Autism Spectrum Disorder,” suggesting that his condition should exempt him from capital punishment.
Alongside this, they also submitted a request to “Redact or Seal Newly Filed Records,” keeping certain details out of public view.
It remains unclear whether Kohberger has been formally diagnosed with autism or if his legal team is seeking an evaluation to support their argument.
Meanwhile, prosecutors have countered with a motion to prevent the defense from introducing any neuropsychological or psychiatric evaluations at trial.
They argue that Idaho law does not permit mental conditions to serve as a defense, except in cases where state of mind is a crucial element.
Death Penalty Debate and Firing Squad Considerations
The debate over Kohberger’s potential sentence coincides with significant changes in Idaho’s execution protocols.
Last year, the state introduced the firing squad as an alternative execution method due to shortages of lethal injection drugs.
However, a new legislative push seeks to make the firing squad the primary execution method.
Steve Goncalves, father of victim Kaylee Goncalves, has been vocal about his desire for Kohberger to face capital punishment, particularly by firing squad if convicted.
He has even reached out to state lawmakers to support the proposed bill, stating, “There’s no reason to have capital punishment if this isn’t the case for it.”
Kohberger’s Defense Strategy and Alibi Claims
Kohberger, a former criminology PhD student, faces charges for the brutal murders of University of Idaho students Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin in November 2022.
His defense team has previously attempted to have the death penalty removed from consideration, arguing that Idaho’s execution methods and prolonged death row waiting periods amount to cruel and unusual punishment.
However, their efforts were struck down by Judge Steven Hippler.
As part of his defense, Kohberger has provided an alibi, claiming he was driving alone, looking at the stars, and hiking on the night of the murders.
However, prosecutors have dismissed this as a weak excuse, arguing that he has failed to specify exact locations or provide witnesses.
They have asked the judge to block the defense from presenting any alibi evidence unless Kohberger himself testifies.
DNA Evidence and the Battle Over Investigative Genetic Genealogy
One of the most critical pieces of evidence in the case is DNA found on a knife sheath at the crime scene.
Investigators linked this DNA to Kohberger through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), a method that traces suspects through family DNA databases.
A relative of Kohberger had previously submitted their DNA to such a database but refused to cooperate with authorities when asked to provide further samples.
Despite the defense’s efforts to discredit the IGG method, Judge Hippler ruled that the DNA evidence could remain in the case.
This ruling dealt a major blow to Kohberger’s legal team and prompted a shake-up in his defense strategy.
Public defender Jay Logsdon was removed as trial counsel and replaced with Bicka Barlow, a California attorney known for her expertise in forensic DNA cases.
What’s Next for Kohberger’s Trial?
With Kohberger’s trial scheduled for August, both sides are gearing up for a legal showdown.
His next court appearance is set for April, where more pre-trial motions will be heard.
As prosecutors continue to build their case, the defense will likely focus on challenging DNA evidence and pushing for alternative explanations.
With the death penalty still on the table and Idaho’s potential shift toward firing squad executions, the outcome of this trial could have far-reaching implications.
The question remains: Will Kohberger’s new autism claim influence the court’s decision, or will prosecutors push forward with their pursuit of capital punishment?