Bryan Kohberger is accused of the November 13, 2022, stabbing deaths of four University of Idaho students—Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin—in Moscow, Idaho. The prosecution’s case against him relies on several key pieces of evidence, though the defense has challenged their validity and admissibility. Below is a summary of the primary evidence presented against Kohberger, based on available information:
- DNA Evidence: A critical piece of evidence is the male DNA found on a tan leather knife sheath in Mogen’s bedroom at the crime scene. This DNA was matched to Kohberger through genetic genealogy techniques, with a cheek swab confirming a statistical match to the sample from the sheath. Additionally, DNA from trash at Kohberger’s family home in Pennsylvania was linked to the crime scene DNA. The defense has sought to suppress this evidence, questioning the reliability of investigative genetic genealogy.
- Vehicle and Surveillance Footage: Authorities identified a white Hyundai Elantra near the crime scene via surveillance footage, captured multiple times between 3:29 a.m. and 4:20 a.m. on November 13, 2022. Kohberger owned a matching 2015 white Hyundai Elantra, registered to him at Washington State University (WSU) in Pullman, Washington, about 10 miles from Moscow. The vehicle was located at his apartment complex shortly after police issued a public request for information about such a car.
- Cell Phone Data: Phone records indicate Kohberger’s cell phone was near the victims’ residence on at least twelve occasions before the murders, mostly during late evening or early morning hours. This suggests he may have been in the area frequently. However, the defense claims Kohberger was driving south of Pullman and west of Moscow on the night of the killings, an alibi they plan to support with cell phone tower data and an expert witness.
- Witness Testimony: One surviving roommate, Dylan Mortensen, reported seeing a masked man with “bushy eyebrows” in the house around the time of the murders. Her description aligns with Kohberger’s physical characteristics, though the defense argues her account is unreliable due to inconsistencies, possible intoxication, and media exposure.
- Digital and Behavioral Evidence: Kohberger’s phone showed searches for the “University of Idaho Murders,” a Ted Bundy program, and a YouTube video about the victims after the killings, suggesting interest in the case. He also messaged one of the victims on Instagram multiple times before the murders, though there’s no evidence of a response. Additionally, he visited the Mad Greek restaurant in Moscow, where Mogen and Kernodle worked, at least twice. His Amazon purchase history, including a KA-BAR knife, sheath, and sharpener bought months earlier, is also under scrutiny, though the defense argues the account was shared and purchases may not be attributable to Kohberger alone.
- Other Circumstantial Evidence: Items seized from Kohberger’s Pennsylvania home included a cell phone, black gloves, black masks, laptops, and knives, though no murder weapon was found. His background as a criminology Ph.D. student at WSU, his interest in criminal psychology, and prior interactions (like a Reddit survey on criminal behavior) have been noted, though these are contextual rather than direct evidence.
The defense has countered with arguments of alternate perpetrators, citing unknown male blood on a stairwell and a glove outside the crime scene, and has challenged the admissibility of much of the prosecution’s evidence, including genetic data and digital records. Kohberger’s autism spectrum disorder diagnosis has also been raised to argue against the death penalty and to explain his demeanor, which could be misinterpreted by a jury. The trial, set for August 2025 in Boise, Idaho, will hinge on how the court evaluates this evidence.
Note: Due to a gag order, some details remain limited, and the defense’s motions to suppress evidence could impact what is presented at trial. The evidence summarized here reflects the prosecution’s case as reported, but its weight and admissibility are still under judicial review.
