A judge has ruled that a former roommate of the four University of Idaho students killed in 2022 will be allowed to testify about seeing an intruder with “bushy eyebrows” around the time of the crime. This decision was made despite defense attorneys for Bryan Kohberger requesting that any evidence referencing “bushy eyebrows” be excluded, citing the roommate’s description as unreliable and irrelevant.
The ruling, released on Friday, permits the testimony during Kohberger’s trial on four murder charges, which is scheduled to begin later this year. Kohberger, who was 30 at the time, faces charges for the stabbing deaths of Ethan Chapin, Xana Kernodle, Madison Mogen, and Kaylee Goncalves at a rental home near the University of Idaho campus in Moscow.
Kohberger, a former criminal justice graduate student at Washington State University, was apprehended in Pennsylvania weeks after the murders. Authorities linked his DNA to genetic material found on a knife sheath at the crime scene. When prompted to enter a plea, Kohberger remained silent, leading the judge to enter a not guilty plea on his behalf.
According to court documents, the roommate informed police that she saw someone dressed in black clothing and a ski mask inside the home before 4:19 a.m. on the day of the killings. She was intoxicated at the time and was unable to recall other facial features, but distinctly remembered the intruder’s bushy eyebrows.
Kohberger’s defense attorneys argued that the roommate’s testimony was unreliable as she was under the influence of alcohol and sleepiness, and had only a brief opportunity to see the intruder. They claimed that allowing such testimony could unfairly prejudice the jury into associating Kohberger with the crime based solely on his eyebrows.
Judge Steven Hippler, however, stated that the issue is suitable for cross-examination, not for precluding the testimony. He emphasized the distinction between a witness being incompetent to testify and being subject to rigorous questioning.
Additionally, the judge addressed potential defense strategies regarding Kohberger’s medical diagnoses if he were to be convicted. Prosecutors sought to exclude testimony related to Kohberger’s autism spectrum disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and developmental coordination disorder during the penalty phase, aiming to prevent these conditions from mitigating his culpability.
The defense asserted that they did not intend to use these diagnoses to reduce culpability. Instead, they argued that Kohberger’s autism spectrum disorder would explain his courtroom demeanor, such as prolonged eye contact, stillness, and stoicism.
Judge Hippler noted that he had not observed any unusual behavior from Kohberger during the proceedings. He cautioned that introducing evidence about Kohberger’s autism spectrum might confuse the jury and unnecessarily prolong the trial. Nonetheless, he acknowledged that Kohberger’s demeanor might become pertinent if he chooses to testify, and that his OCD diagnosis could be considered relevant due to its impact on his sleep and habits.
The judge instructed attorneys to raise any related issues outside the jury’s presence to determine the appropriateness of introducing such evidence during the trial.
