Court Filing
Electronically Filed 8/18/2025 3:38 PM Fourth Judicial District, Ada County Trent Tripple, Clerk of the Court Anne Taylor Law, PLLC By: Jennifer Keyes, Deputy Clerk Anne C. Taylor, Attorney at Law PO Box 2347 Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 Phone: (208) 512-9611 iCourt Email: info@annetaylorlaw.com Elisa G. Massoth, PLLC Attorney at Law P.O. Box 1003 Payette, Idaho 83661 Phone: (208) 642-3797; Fax: (208)642-3799 Bicka Barlow Pro Hac Vice 2358 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94114 Phone: (415) 553-4110 Assigned Attorney: Anne C. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Bar Number: 5836 Elisa G. Massoth, Attorney at Law, Bar Number: 5647 Bicka Barlow, Attorney at Law, CA Bar Number: 178723 Jay W. Logsdon, First District Public Defender, Bar Number: 8759 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ADA STATE OF IDAHO, CASE NUMBER CR01-24-31665 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE V. COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS BRYAN C. KOHBERGER, Defendant. COMES NOW, Bryan C. Kohberger, by and through his attorneys of record, and hereby submits his response to the Court's Order Regarding Sealed Documents dated August 4, 2025. The Defense's objection / no objections are listed under each item below. DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS Page-1 1. 7/24/25: State's Exhibits Sl-5-7 / 23 / 2025 Sentencing Hearing, which include photographs of each of the deceased victims and a photograph of the six victims together (five (5) exhibits) The Defense has no Objection to unsealing. 2. 7/23/25: Orders Modifying / Amending No Contact Order (seven (7) orders) The Defense has no objection to unsealing with redactions of anticipated witness names, address and personal identifying information based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5). 3. 7/15/25: Opposition to Motion to Vacate Nondissemination Order The Defense has no Objection to unsealing. 4. 7/9/25: SEALED Exhibit S-1 to State's Response to Defendant's 24th Supplemental Request for Discovery The Defense has no objection to unsealing with anticipated witness names being redacted based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 5. 7/3/25: Sheriffs Return concerning witness K.S.F. The Defense has no objection to unsealing with redactionwith redactions of anticipated witness names, address and all personal identifying information based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5). 6. 7/2/25: Guilty Plea Advisory form completed by Defendant The Defense has no Objection to unsealing. 7.6 / 27 / 25: 2nd Notice of Filing Defendant's Additions I Objections to the Juror Questionnaire The Defense Objects based on the language of ICAR 32 (g) (8). All renditions of the Juror Questionnaire were sealed and not for circulation. Portions of the Questionnaire contain sensitive information relating to mental health and other portions contain potential witness information. The Defense submits that ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) apply to people having names revealed. There is continued public and media scrutiny relating to this case and keeping names protected will prevent harm, harassment and sensitive information from becoming media fodder. Even though this pleading does not contain that information the Defense suggests that all parts of the Questionnaire be treated the same. DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS Page-2 8. 6/27/25: Sheriffs return concerning witness T.A.D. The Defense has no objection to unsealing with redaction of anticipated witness names, address and all personal identifying information based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5). The Defense has no objection to unsealing with redactions of anticipated witness names, address and personal identifying information based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5). 9. 6/26/25: SEALED Order on Defendant's Offer of Proof RE: Alternate Perpetrators (unredacted) The Defense Objects based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention – including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. The public copy contains all pertinent information but withholds the names and is appropriate. 10. 6/25/25: SEALED Exhibit W to Defendant's 24th Supplemental Request for Discovery The Defense has no objection to unsealing with anticipated witness names being redacted based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 11. 6/25/25: State's Amended Notice of Compliance and Motion to Seal States Amended Witness List The Defense Objects to lay witness names being released based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention – including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 12. 6/18/25: Court Minutes for Closed Session re Motion concerning Alternate perpetrators The Defense has no objection to unsealing the Court Minutes. 13. 6/16/25: State's Motion to Seal Ex Parte Filings RE: Out of State Witnesses The Defense has no objection to unsealing. DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS Page-3 14. 6/16/25: Exhibit S-l (b) to State's Supplemental Response to Request for Discovery RE: Expert Testimony The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 15. 6/16/25: Exhibit S-l (a) to State's Supplemental Response to Request for Discovery RE: Expert Testimony The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 16. 6/16/25: Exhibit S-1 to State's Supplemental Response to Request for Discovery RE: Expert Testimony The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 17. 6/13/25: Sheriffs Return concerning witness Y.R. The Defense has no objection to unsealing with redaction of anticipated witness names, address and all personal identifying information based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5). The Defense has no objection to unsealing with redactions of anticipated witness names, address and personal identifying information based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5). 18. 6/13/25: Defendant's Reply in Support of Motion for Access The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 19. 6/13/25: Defendant's Reply to State's Objection to Defendant's Offer of Proof RE: Alternate Perpetrators and Defendant's Evidence in Support of Offer of ProofRE: Alternate Perpetrator The Defense requests redaction of anticipated witness names based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention – including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 20. 6/12/25: State's Motion to Amend Witness List and Supplement Expert Disclosure The Defense position is that redaction of anticipated witness name is appropriate based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention – including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 21. 6/12/25: Notice of Filing-SEALED Defendant's Amended Exhibit Chart DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS Page-4 The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 22. 6/12/25: Order Sealing State's Response to Defendant's Motion RE: Special Investigation The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 23. 6/12/25: Order Sealing Defendant's Motion for Access and Objection to Court's Order The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 24. 6/11/25: Motion to Seal State's Response to Defendant's Motion RE: Special Investigation The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 25. 6/11/25: State's Response to Defendant's Motion RE: Special Investigation The Defense has no objection to unsealing 26. 6/11/25: Defendant's Objection to Release of Privileged and Confidential Work Product The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 27. 6/11/25: Defendant's Motion for Access & Fair Investigation The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 28. 6/11/25: Motion to Seal Defendant's Motion for Access and Objection to Court's Order The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 29. 6/9/25: Witness List-Defendant's 2nd Amended Phase Two Mitigation Witness List The Defense Objects based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 30. 6/9/25: Order Staying Order The Defense has no objection to unsealing. DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS Page-5 31. 6/9/25: Order Sealing Defendant's Motion and Order for Emergency Order The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 32. 6/9/25: Order Conditionally Denying Admission of Additional Exhibits as Evidence at Trial The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 33. 6/9/25: Order Granting Defense Expert Analysis of Evidence The Defense Objects to unredacted release, and requests redaction of the expert's name and address. The request is based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 34. 6/6/25: State's Response RE: Defendant's Motion for Independent Analysis of Evidence The Defense Objects to unredacted release, and requests redaction of the expert's name and address. The request is based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 35. 6/6/25: Motion for Emergency Order The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 36. 6/6/25: Motion to Seal Defendant's Motion and Order for Emergency Order The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 37. 6/6/25: Stipulated Motion to the Admission of Additional Exhibits as Evidence at Trial The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 38. 6/6/25: Motion for Independent Analysis of Evidence The Defense Objects to unredacted release, and requests redaction of the expert's name and address. The request is based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS Page-6 39.6 / 6 / 25: State's Objection to " Defendant's Offer of Proof RE: Alternate Perpetrators " and " Defendant's Evidence in Support of Officer of Proof RE: Alternate Perpetrator " The Defense requests redaction of anticipated witness names based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention – including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 40. 6/5/25: Order Granting Access to Sealed Record The Defense has no objection to unsealing. 41. 6/4/25: Exhibit S-1 to State's Supplemental Response to Defendants Request for Discovery The Defense has no objection to unsealing with anticipated witness names being redacted based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 42. 6/3/25: Exhibit S-1 to State's Response to Defendant's 23rd Supplemental Request for Discovery The Defense has no objection to unsealing with anticipated witness names being redacted based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) –there is continued media attention including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. 43. 6/2/25: Exhibit V to Defendant's 23rd Supplemental Request for Discovery. The Defense has no objection to unsealing based on ICAR 32 (i) (3) (A) (1,3 and 5) there is continued media attention – including social media and online sleuths and public harassment reasons. Online media reflects continued attention and comments that may be offensive and harassing and impact safety and livelihood of persons named. DATED this 18 day of August, 2025. an DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS Page-7 ANNE C. TAYLOR ANNE TAYLOR LAW, PLLC CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was personally served as indicated below on the 18 day of August, 2025 addressed to: Latah County Prosecuting Attorney –via Email: paservice@latahcountyid.gov Elisa Massoth – via Email: legalassistant@kmrs.net Jay Logsdon – via Email: Jay.Logsdon@spd.idaho.gov Bicka Barlow, Attorney at Law – via Email: bickabarlow@sbcglobal.net Jeffery Nye, Deputy Attorney General – via Email: Jeff.nye@ag.idaho.gov Dul DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDER REGARDING SEALED DOCUMENTS Page-8