Kohberger Got a New Hearing — His Expert Called for This

**Tony Brueski** (0:12)
He must have gotten mad that he wasn't in the news cycle as much as he used to be. He wasn't getting the same amount of clicks that he used to get. It's true, he wasn't. I mean, he wasn't. I can tell you from this end of covering this case, the vibrato, the lack thereof.
The era of Bryan Kohberger was coming to a fast end. I think Bryan Kohberger realized that. Then Bryan Kohberger started believing his own bullshit from behind bars.
Because he's going to get an evidentiary hearing. I know, I know the same the same sort of thing that Santa Claus DA promised the families and everybody that we by accepting this plea, that's really kind of shitty requires them to admit nothing. I mean, he has to say he did it, but he doesn't tell you anything about it.
And we're just we're just going to kind of railroad this through without really getting everybody's true opinion on it. Because I know better, I'm Santa Claus.
And I mean, it prevents you from going to the heartache of all this shit. Well guess what? It's going to go through all of that shit.
So the whole let's just accept this plea and get it over with. Santa didn't see this one coming down the chimney. Talking about the.
Local prosecutor, by the way, who I've effectively called Santa Claus since the beginning. Why? Because he seems like he'd be a lovely person to have milk and cookies with and maybe a candy cane. Probably not the person I want prosecuting a quadruple homicide.
Just saying it.
Not because Kohberger didn't do it. Yeah, Kohberger did it.
But because I don't think he had the means to match Ann Taylor. But anyway, that's all said and done. Now, Kohberger wants a new judge. He's got new attorneys, ones that work out of the mini mall. I don't know what they work out of, but it's kind of like a Better Call Saul type situation. And the state's going to have to figure out what to do here with this. This may absolutely go nowhere. This may end with the evidentiary hearing next year. But let's get into all of it. And please drop your thoughts in the comment section on Substack and YouTube. Those links are in the description. Two days after Judge Stephen Hippler scheduled an evidentiary hearing for June 17th of 2027 Mark your calendars. A great way to kick off this summer of 27 Hey kids, where are we going? We're going to go to Bryan Kohberger's evidentiary hearing and stay at the La Quinta. We'll have breakfast at the Waffle House. I hope you're excited. Can you imagine the drawings that the kids are going to draw next year? When they get back in, it's like, what did you do on your summer vacation? Who's that strange looking man? That's Bryan Kohberger. Why is he taking a selfie with his shirt off? Bryan Kohberger's new attorney filed to remove the judge entirely. Greg Rauch filed a motion on August 20th to disqualify Hippler from the post conviction proceedings and a separate motion to move the case out of Ada County. The man who pled guilty to four murders 13 months ago isn't just fighting his plea anymore. He's fighting the judge, the venue and the calendar all at once as if those are really even up for consideration. Nobody said you're getting a new trial, Bryan. Let's not put the horse before the cart, shall we? Every motion filed since the hearing was scheduled tells you the same thing. Kohberger's team doesn't think the facts alone get them where they need to go. The problem is you already admitted to it. The disqualification motion rests on what Hippler said at sentencing in July 25 before handing down four consecutive life sentences without parole. Hippler called Kohberger a faceless coward and the worst of the worst. He looked at Kohberger and asked according to the motion whether anyone really believed Kohberger was capable of speaking the truth. He predicted that any explanation from Kohberger would consist of self-serving and untruthful statements. Those aren't throwaway lines at the end of a sentencing. Those are a judge making forward-looking judgments about a defendant's credibility. And credibility is now the central question in the case. And surprise surprise, Kohberger is making self-serving and untruthful statements exactly as predicted. The post-conviction proceeding is a bench trial. No jury, Hippler alone, decides whether Kohberger's plea stands or falls. In a jury trial, a judge's views can be checked by 12 people in the room here. The judge is the verdict. So Rauch's motion argues that the extraordinary coverage of those sentencing comments, adverse rulings and the same judge assignment creates an impartiality problem that can't be ignored. Kohberger is asking the man who called him a faceless coward to believe he was coerced into confessing. During the plea or pre-plea proceedings, Kohberger's original attorney told Hippler that they weren't ready for trial. They said discovery review and their investigation were unfinished. They warned that proceeding could lead to ineffective assistance of council claims. The exact claim Kohberger is now making. Hippler rejected those warnings. According to the motion, the judge accused the defense of using the volume of discovery as a delay tactic. Rauch is now arguing that Hippler has already heard and dismissed the argument at the center of Kohberger's petition. The venue motion adds a second front. Kohberger's criminal trial was moved from Laetaw County to Ada County in 2024 to ensure an impartial jury pool and adequate courtroom resources. But there's no jury anymore. Rauch argues the entire rationale for that move collapses in a bench proceeding where a single judge weighs the evidence. The concerns were about jurors, not judges. And the judge is now the only person in the room who matters. Hippler hasn't ruled on either motion. If he grants this qualification, the case goes to a different judge and a different judge would need time to get up to speed. If he denies it, Rauch has grounds for appeal. Either way, the motions slow the process down. Time is something Kohberger's team needs. None of that changes the math. Even if Kohberger got a different judge in a different courthouse, he'd face the same standard. Post-sentencing plea withdrawal requires showing manifest injustice, a constitutional violation so egregious and serious that the conviction just can't stand. This does not appear to be that.