University of Idaho murder trial will be held in Boise, Idaho Supreme Court rules
August Frank-Pool/Getty Images
(MOSCOW, Idaho) — The University of Idaho quadruple murder suspect, Bryan Kohberger, will stand trial in the capital city of Boise, Idaho, according to a new ruling from Idaho’s Supreme Court.
With this new venue, a new judge, District Judge Steven Hippler, has been assigned to the case.
The original judge on the case ruled Monday that the case would be moved out of Latah County, where the crime took place, agreeing with the defense who argued that Latah County was tainted by pretrial publicity.
Defense lawyers surveyed Latah County residents and said their results found the “pressure to convict” Kohberger was shown to be “so severe” that the venue couldn’t be impartial.
The defense said one respondent answered they would “burn the courthouse down” if he were not convicted. The same survey, according to the defense, found “much less emotional” responses from people living closer to Boise, which is about 300 miles south of Moscow.
The prosecution has said the case has national and international interest, and that the case has been covered plenty in Boise, so a change of venue would not solve any problem.
The relatives of victim Kaylee Goncalves didn’t want the venue changed, saying they “felt that a fair and impartial jury could be found in Latah County,” and they believed keeping the trial locally would help the community heal.
Kohberger is accused of fatally stabbing four University of Idaho students in an off-campus house in the early hours of Nov. 13, 2022.
Kohberger, a criminology Ph.D. student at nearby Washington State University at the time of the crime, was charged with four counts of first-degree murder and one count of burglary. A not guilty plea was entered on his behalf.
The trial is set to begin on June 2, 2025.
If convicted, Kohberger could face the death penalty.
(NEW YORK) — The Department of Homeland Security’s internal watchdog says it has uncovered an “urgent issue” with how immigration officials handle cases involving unaccompanied migrant children, warning in a new report that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency has been unable to keep track of all unaccompanied minors released from government custody.
The interim report, sent to Congress on Tuesday and obtained by ABC News, said that — in the past five years — more than 32,000 unaccompanied migrant children failed to appear for their immigration court hearings, and ICE was “not able to account” for all of their locations.
“Without an ability to monitor the location and status of [unaccompanied migrant children], ICE has no assurance [they] are safe from trafficking, exploitation, or forced labor,” Inspector General Joseph Cuffari wrote in his interim report.
He urged ICE to “take immediate action to ensure the safety of [unaccompanied children] residing in the United States.”
Cuffari’s report is part of a broader audit of ICE’s ability to track unaccompanied migrant children who have been released or transferred from U.S. custody after entering the country.
According to the interim report, immigration officials transferred more than 448,000 unaccompanied migrant children from 2019 to 2023, spanning both the Trump and Biden administrations. After interviewing more than 100 officials and visiting ten ICE field offices, the inspector general found that immigration officials “cannot always monitor the location and status of unaccompanied migrant children who are released … and [then] did not appear as scheduled in immigration court.”
When unaccompanied migrant children do not show up to court, federal judges will often issue several continuances — to postpone the hearings for months — until they are left with no choice but to issue deportation orders.
Earlier this year, ABC News attended several hearings at immigration court in Hyattsville, Maryland, where federal judges were forced to issue removal orders for unaccompanied migrant children who did not appear for their scheduled hearings. And for those who do appear, only 56% are represented by counsel, according to the Department of Justice.
ABC News previously reported that tens of thousands of unaccompanied young migrants are representing themselves before federal immigration judges due to a litany of issues crippling the court system.
In his interim report, Cuffari said that as of May 2024, more than 291,000 unaccompanied children had not been placed into removal proceedings because ICE had not served them notices to appear or scheduled a court date for them. Accordingly, the number of unaccompanied children who failed to appear for their court dates “may have been much larger” than 32,000 had ICE issued notices or scheduled court dates for those 291,000 children.
“Immigration court hearings are often ICE’s only opportunity to observe and screen [children] for trafficking indicators or other safety concerns,” the interim report said.
So, according to the report, when ICE fails to service notices to appear, or schedule court dates, that “reduces opportunities to verify their safety.”
The report cited a number of key challenges for ICE, noting that, among other issues, “ICE still lacks adequate staffing, which can limit officers’ time and ability to check the location or immigration case status of migrants.”
“Resource constraints also impact [their] ability to issue [notices] to all [unaccompanied children] after their release from HHS’ custody,” the report said.
The report also said that ICE is burdened by “manual, multi-step processes to share information on [children] who do not appear in court.”
The watchdog suggested that Homeland Security officials “develop and implement an automated system to document court appearances and maintain address information of unaccompanied migrant children.”
Agency officials agreed with the watchdog’s recommendation to incorporate an automated tracking mechanism, according to a brief response included with the 18-page interim report. But they also suggested that the assessments in the watchdog’s interim report failed to articulate some structural challenges that complicate their ability to track migrant children and “therefore lead to misunderstandings about the process.”
Lev Radin/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — New York City’s deputy mayor for public safety, Phil Banks III, resigned Monday in the latest fallout from the corruption scandal engulfing the administration of Mayor Eric Adams.
“We spoke yesterday and we spoke again this morning and he stated he wants to move on to other things in his life,” Adams told NY1. “I wish my good friend well.”
Banks’ brother, David Banks, resigned as schools chancellor. First Deputy Mayor Sheena Wright, David Banks’ wife, is arranging her departure from the administration.
Phil Banks had his phones seized last month as part of a federal investigation into city contracts of how the police department enforced nightlife regulations. David Banks and Sheena Wright had their phones seized as well.
Phil Banks, at one point the highest-ranking uniformed officer in the NYPD, resigned from the department in 2014 amid a different corruption scandal during the prior administration. Federal prosecutors at the time named Banks an unindicted coconspirator.
Adams has pleaded not guilty to a five-count indictment charging him with bribery and fraud. He is resisting calls for his resignation.
“New Yorkers are saying keep doing the job you’ve been doing,” Adams told NY1.
A Newsmax microphone is seen during the third day of the 2024 Republican National Convention at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee, July 17, 2024. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — Attorneys for the voting machine company Smartmatic and the cable channel Newsmax argued at a hearing Monday over evidence and witnesses expected to be presented when Smartmatic’s defamation case against the news channel goes to trial later this month.
Smartmatic has accused Newsmax of publishing dozens of false reports claiming that Smartmatic helped rig the 2020 election. Newsmax has argued, in part, that they were reporting on newsworthy claims of fraud.
Howard Cooper, an attorney for Newsmax, argued at Monday’s hearing that the news channel should be able to introduce videos of broadcast segments that he says rebut Smartmatic’s argument that “Newsmax took this position of election fraud [and] not calling the election” for winner Joe Biden.
“One of the ways that we can rebut that theory is by showing shows that were contrary to President Trump’s position,” Cooper said of former President Donald Trump, who falsely claimed there had been massive election fraud.
The two sides also argued over the inclusion of witnesses who would testify about whether Newsmax, in the course of its reporting, reached out to Smartmatic — or instead only reached out to Dominion, another voting machine company that was falsely accused of wrongdoing.
Dominion, in a separate case last year, reached a $787 million settlement with Fox News in a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit.
Newsmax officials have said under oath that the company contacted or attempted to contact Smartmatic during its coverage of the election and its aftermath.
“We’re not disputing that Dominion and Smartmatic are not the same,” said an attorney for Newsmax. “Some of these Newsmax personnel did get to contact Dominion. It is relevant to the case. It’s relevant to their state of mind.”
“I’d love for you to make that argument if I’m on the other side,” Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said in response. “Here is the executive producer of this show, and he doesn’t know the difference between Exxon and Chevron.”
After a lengthy argument about other types of evidence the parties would like to introduce at the trial, the judge reviewed the potential witness list and emphasized the need for clear and concise jury instructions.
At one point during the hearing, an attorney for Newsmax requested permission to depose Smartmatic’s damages expert, arguing that the expert’s “reports and charts” on the damages have changed frequently.
“I would only add they were looking for somewhere, and we don’t know yet, between $400 and $600 million in this case,” an attorney for Newsmax said, criticizing “the idea that we would go to a trial without having a full opportunity to do an up-to-date examination of their damages expert.”
An attorney for Smartmatic pushed back, saying that Newsmax attorneys have previously deposed the expert and that “none of the information has changed.”
Judge Davis said he would rule soon on each of the motions.
The trial is scheduled to begin on Sept. 30 in Delaware.
