Murder In Moscow: Bryan Kohberger Moves To Exclude Inflammatory Evidence (3/18/25)
18.3.2025
0:00
10:37
In Case No. CR01-24-31665, the defense has filed Motion in Limine #1 to exclude inflammatory evidence in the trial of Bryan Kohberger. The motion argues that certain evidence may unfairly prejudice the jury, inflaming emotions rather than contributing to a fair and impartial evaluation of the facts. The defense contends that such evidence lacks probative value and could lead to an unfair trial, potentially violating Kohberger’s constitutional rights.
The motion requests that the court carefully review and exclude any evidence deemed overly graphic, emotionally charged, or otherwise prejudicial. The defense emphasizes the importance of ensuring a trial based on facts and legal standards rather than emotional reactions. By filing this motion, Kohberger’s legal team aims to prevent any undue influence on the jury and secure a fair judicial process.
In Motions in Limine #2 and #3 in Case No. CR01-24-31665, Bryan Kohberger’s defense seeks to exclude additional prejudicial evidence from trial. Motion #2 requests the exclusion of speculative or unreliable expert testimony, arguing that such testimony could mislead the jury and lacks a sufficient scientific basis. The defense contends that only properly vetted, methodologically sound expert opinions should be admitted to ensure a fair trial. Motion #3 seeks to bar any references to uncharged or unrelated bad acts allegedly committed by Kohberger. The defense argues that introducing such evidence would unfairly bias the jury, violating evidentiary rules that prohibit character attacks unrelated to the charges at hand. Both motions emphasize the necessity of maintaining a trial based strictly on admissible, fact-based evidence to ensure due process.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-1-RE-Inflammatory-Evidence.pdf
022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-3-RE-Use-Term-Murder.pdf
022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-4-RE-Using-Terms-Psychopath-Sociopath.pdf
The motion requests that the court carefully review and exclude any evidence deemed overly graphic, emotionally charged, or otherwise prejudicial. The defense emphasizes the importance of ensuring a trial based on facts and legal standards rather than emotional reactions. By filing this motion, Kohberger’s legal team aims to prevent any undue influence on the jury and secure a fair judicial process.
In Motions in Limine #2 and #3 in Case No. CR01-24-31665, Bryan Kohberger’s defense seeks to exclude additional prejudicial evidence from trial. Motion #2 requests the exclusion of speculative or unreliable expert testimony, arguing that such testimony could mislead the jury and lacks a sufficient scientific basis. The defense contends that only properly vetted, methodologically sound expert opinions should be admitted to ensure a fair trial. Motion #3 seeks to bar any references to uncharged or unrelated bad acts allegedly committed by Kohberger. The defense argues that introducing such evidence would unfairly bias the jury, violating evidentiary rules that prohibit character attacks unrelated to the charges at hand. Both motions emphasize the necessity of maintaining a trial based strictly on admissible, fact-based evidence to ensure due process.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-1-RE-Inflammatory-Evidence.pdf
022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-3-RE-Use-Term-Murder.pdf
022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-4-RE-Using-Terms-Psychopath-Sociopath.pdf
Flere episoder fra "Beyond The Horizon"
Gå ikke glip af nogen episoder af “Beyond The Horizon” - abonnér på podcasten med gratisapp GetPodcast.
