Bryan Kohberger's handwritten Idaho murders confession revealed amid furious speculation about his motive
In the document - a written factual basis to accompany the plea agreement - the 30-year-old killer admits to all five charges against him, including one count of burglary and four counts of first-degree murder.
He admits to breaking into the off-campus student home of 1122 King Road, Moscow, on November 13, 2022 'with the intent to commit the crime of murder.'
For all four of his victims - Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin - Kohberger admits to their 'willful, unlawful, deliberate, with premeditation and with malice aforethought, killing and murder.'
The killer signed the document in pen on July 1, with his scrawling handwriting reading: 'Bryan C. Kohberger'.
Hours after it was signed, the 30-year-old criminology PhD student appeared in Ada County Courthouse on the morning of Wednesday July 2 where he formally changed his plea to guilty in front of his victims' devastated families.
Notably absent from his signed confession as well as his comments in the courtroom was any indication about his motive for the brutal murders.
Staring stone cold ahead at Judge Steven Hippler, Kohberger offered no answers for why he decided to kill and how he chose his victims - simply answering one words of 'yes,' 'no' and 'guilty' to each question.
Bryan Kohberger's signed confession admitting to the murders and all five charges against him
To this day, there remains no known connection between Kohberger and any of the victims or their two surviving roommates, Bethany Funke and Dylan Mortensen.
But, during the plea hearing, Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson told the court that Kohberger may have not planned to kill as many people as he did that night.
'We will not represent that he intended to commit all of the murders that he did that night, but we know that that is what resulted,' he said.
Thompson did not reveal who prosecutors believe was Kohberger's intended target that night but sources close to the investigation previously told Dateline it is believed to be Mogen, based in part on the path the killer took after entering the three-story student home.
After planning his attack - buying a KaBar knife months before as the murder weapon - Thompson said Kohberger entered the home through the back sliding door on the second floor.
He went straight up to Mogen's room on the third floor where he found Mogen and her best friend Goncalves sleeping in the same bed.
He stabbed both of them to death.
On his way back downstairs or on leaving the property, he encountered Kernodle, who was still awake and had just received a DoorDash order.
He fatally attacked her with the knife and then also murdered her sleeping boyfriend Chapin.
On his way out of the home, Kohberger passed Mortensen who had been woken by the noise and peeked round her bedroom door.
While the victims' families were left devastated by the chilling murders - and the community of Moscow reeled - Kohberger finished out his semester at WSU and meticulously scrubbed his apartment in Pullman and his car clean of evidence.
He was arrested around six weeks on from the crime at his parents' home in the Poconos region of Pennsylvania.
It is not clear if the judge will require him to provide a detailed statement to the court at his sentencing on July 23.
But, in the absence of confirmation, many theories have emerged.
Kohberger's decision to study psychology and criminal justice at DeSales University, under top serial killer expert Dr. Katherine Ramsland, and his behavior toward women have fallen under the spotlight.
Former classmates told the Daily Mail that they were taught about notorious serial killers and mass murderers including Ted Bundy and Elliot Rodger on the course.
Rodger had killed six and wounded another 13 in a violent rampage near the University of California, Santa Barbara, before turning a gun on himself.
He left behind a warped 137-page manifesto laying out his incel motive - a hatred of women - and writing that a former friend named Maddy had 'eventually come to represent everything I hate and despise.'
Two of Kohberger's former classmates tell the Daily Mail they recall learning about Rodger and his manifesto in class - and wonder if Kohberger is also an incel.
Dateline previously revealed that Kohberger also made several internet searches related to Bundy - including watching a YouTube video about him and dressing up like the serial killer two days before his arrest.
His phone was also allegedly used to search for pornography along with terms like 'passed out', 'forced', 'drugged' and 'sleeping' in the weeks around November 2022.
He was then fired from his Washington State University teaching assistant role days before the murders, due to his behavior towards female students.
Some of the victims' families have demanded that Kohberger be forced to answer questions about his motive as part of the plea deal.
In a post on the family Facebook page, the Goncalves family wrote: 'At a bare minimum, please - require a full confession, full accountability, location of the murder weapon, confirmation the defendant acted alone, & the true facts of what happened that night. We deserve to know when the beginning of the end was.'
The plea deal, which came as a bombshell move just weeks before the trial was set to begin, has divided the families of the victims.
Goncalves' father Steve Goncalves refused to attend Wednesday's hearing as a sign of protest.
In a post on Facebook, the family blasted the deal, saying: 'BK literally is too afraid to die, but he wasn't afraid to kill. BK wanted a plea deal and he was given one. Kaylee wasn't offered a plea deal. The state is showing BK mercy by removing the death penalty. BK did not show Kaylee ANY mercy.'
Kernodle's aunt Kim Kernodle similarly told TMZ that the family had vehemently opposed the deal when it was suggested by prosecutors - and voiced her confusion given the state had previously told them they had enough for a conviction.
On the other hand, family members of Chapin and Mogen voiced their support for the deal.
Outside court following the hearing, an attorney representing Mogen's mom Karen Laramie and stepdad Scott Laramie said they backed the deal '100 per cent.'
'We now embark on a new path. We turn from tragedy and mourning,' Leander James told reporters.
'We turn from darkness and uncertainty of the legal process to the light of the future. We have closure. We embark on a path of hope and healing. We invite all of those who have mourned with us to join us, and we wish you well.'
The killer gave one word answers and offered no emotion or remorse in the hearing
Under the terms of the deal, Kohberger avoided the death penalty for the murders.
Instead, he will be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole and will also never have a chance to appeal his conviction or sentence.
Kohberger will now return to court for his sentencing hearing on July 23.
The families of the victims will be given the opportunity to deliver impact statements and Kohberger could also speak.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
14 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The inside story of the Murdoch editor taking on Donald Trump
The danger posed to Donald Trump was obvious. It was a story that not only drew attention to his links to a convicted sex offender, it also risked widening a growing wedge between the president and some of his most vociferous supporters. The White House quickly concluded a full-force response was required. It was Tuesday 15 July. The Wall Street Journal had approached Trump's team, stating it planned to publish allegations that Trump had composed a crude poem and doodle as part of a collection compiled for Jeffrey Epstein's 50th birthday. The claim would have been damaging at any moment, but the timing was terrible for the president. The Epstein issue was developing into the biggest crisis of his presidency. Strident Maga supporters had been angered by the Trump administration's refusal to release government files relating to the late sex offender. Trump and his loyal press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, reached for the nuclear option. From Air Force One, they called the Journal's British editor-in-chief, Emma Tucker. They turned up the heat. Trump fumed that the letter was fake. Drawing wasn't his thing. Threats were made to sue, a course of action he had previously unleashed against other perceived media enemies. Washington DC began to hum with rumours that the Journal had a hot story on its hands. When no article materialised on Wednesday, some insiders perceived a growing confidence within the White House that their rearguard action had killed the story. They were wrong. DC's gossip mill had reached fever pitch by Thursday afternoon. The article finally emerged in the early evening. The city collectively stopped to read. In the hours that followed publication, the tension intensified. Trump revealed he had confronted Tucker, stating the story was 'false, malicious, and defamatory'. By Friday, he had filed a lawsuit suing the Journal and its owners for at least $10bn (£7.6bn). Tucker was at the centre of a maelstrom of stress and political pressure. It was the greatest challenge of her two and a half years heading the Journal, but far from the first. Two months in, having been parachuted in from London, she was fronting a campaign to have the reporter Evan Gershkovich returned from a Russian prison. She had also faced denunciations from journalists as she pushed through a modernisation drive that included brutal layoffs. Her plans focused on giving stories a sharper edge. On that metric, the Trump call suggested she was overachieving. Throughout her rise, an enigmatic quality has surrounded Tucker. Friends, colleagues and even some critical employees describe an amiable, fun and disarmingly grounded person. Many regarded her ability to retain such qualities in the treacherous terrain of the Murdoch empire as uncanny. The puzzle is exacerbated by the assumption she does not share the rightwing, pro-Brexit views of Rupert Murdoch, News Corp's legendary mogul. Yet Murdoch doesn't hand the Journal to just anyone. While the pro-Maga Fox News is his empire's cash cow, the Journal is his prized possession, giving him power and respectability in wider US political circles, as the Times does in the UK. So, why Tucker? The answer, according to people who have worked with her, is her possession of two qualities Murdoch rates highly: a willingness to make unpopular decisions for the sake of his businesses and a lust for a politically contentious scoop. Lionel Barber, a former Financial Times editor who also worked with Tucker for the FT in Brussels, said: 'She has a very sharp nose for a good news story – always did.' Tucker edited the University of Oxford's student magazine, the Isis, and joined the FT as a graduate trainee. 'She was a very convivial colleague, great company and good on a night out, but you knew when it came down to the work, she would nail it,' said a colleague. 'Very hard-nosed.' After stints in Brussels and Berlin, she won a powerful ally in Robert Thomson, then the FT's foreign editor. Thomson became a close friend to Murdoch, a fellow Australian, while working in the US for the FT. Thomson jumped ship to edit the Times of London in 2002 and in 2008 was dispatched to New York to oversee Murdoch's freshly acquired Journal. Before he went, Thomson helped lure Tucker to the Times, where she eventually became deputy editor. It was her elevation to editor of the Sunday Times in 2020 that seems to have impressed Murdoch. She showed a willingness to make difficult staffing decisions and widened the Sunday Times's digital ambitions, recasting the pro-Brexit paper to appeal to a wider audience. It was there she made an enemy of her first populist world leader. Just months into her tenure, the Sunday Times published a damning account of how Boris Johnson, the then UK prime minister, had handled the Covid pandemic. Downing Street erupted, taking the unusual step of issuing a lengthy rebuttal, denouncing 'falsehoods and errors'. The paper was called 'the most hostile paper in the country' to Johnson's government, despite having backed him at the previous year's election. Rachel Johnson, the former prime minister's sister, is one of Tucker's closest friends. 'I don't think she was ever reckless,' said one Sunday Times staffer. 'But I think she absolutely wanted to push the boundaries of getting as much into the public domain as she possibly could.' Many assumed Tucker's destiny was to edit the Times, but she was catapulted to New York to run the Journal at the start of 2023, immediately embarking on a painful streamlining process. Senior editors were axed. Pulitzer prize winners ditched. The DC bureau, the most powerful, was particularly targeted with layoffs and new leadership. One reporter spoke of people crying, another of the process's serious mental impact. It made Tucker's editorship divisive, leading to the extraordinary spectacle of journalists plastering her unoccupied office with sticky notes denouncing the layoffs. Even some who accepted cuts questioned the methods. Several pointed to the use of 'performance improvement plans', with journalists claiming they had been handed unrealistic targets designed to push them out the door. One described it as 'gratuitously cruel'. A Journal spokesperson said: 'Performance improvement plans are used to set clear objectives and create a development plan that gives an employee feedback and support to meet those objectives. They are being used exactly as designed.' The Tucker enigma re-emerged at the Journal, as staff noted the same mix of personable demeanour, enthusiasm for stories and willingness to make cuts. 'She's very emotionally intelligent – like, the 99th percentile,' said one. They said morale had improved more recently. New hires have followed. A cultural shift on stories also arrived. What emerges is a Tucker Venn diagram. At its overlapping centre lie stories with two qualities: they cover legitimate areas of public importance and aim squarely at eye-catching topics with digital reach. Tucker gave investigative reporters the examples of Elon Musk and China as two potential areas. Some complained the topics were 'clickbaity'. However, one journalist who had had reservations conceded: 'Musk turned out to be a pretty good topic.' Tucker's use of metrics around web traffic and time spent reading a story irked some reporters. Headlines were made more direct. Honorifics such as 'Mr' and 'Mrs' were ditched. There was a ban on stories having more than three bylines. 'She loosened a lot of the strictures that we had,' said one staffer. 'We're encouraged to write more edgy stories.' Positioning the Journal as a punchy rival to the liberal New York Times juggernaut may be a good business plan, but doing so while not falling foul of Murdoch's politics remains a delicate balance. 'There's a particular moment now where the Wall Street Journal has to prove its mettle as the pre-eminent business and financial markets media organisation,' said Paddy Harverson, a contemporary of Tucker's at the FT, now a communications executive. 'They're up against Trump, yet they have an historically centre-right editorial view. She has guided the paper along that tightrope really well.' Allies said Tucker laid a marker of intent in terms of punchy stories when she published an article on the alleged cognitive decline of Joe Biden. It was initially described as a 'hit piece' by the Biden administration. Some see the Epstein story as the latest evidence of Tucker's shift. There are journalists, however, who blame Trump's response for giving the story attention it simply didn't warrant. Others disagree about the extent of Tucker's changes, pointing to the Journal's history of breaking contentious stories, including the hush money paid to Stormy Daniels. However, the net result of the Epstein letter saga has been to draw attention to Tucker's attempted change in tone. Trump's lawsuit means the furore may only just be beginning. Many seasoned media figures assume Murdoch, who does not respond well to bullying, will not back down. However, neither billionaire will relish having to face depositions and disclosures. Any settlement from Murdoch could put pressure on Tucker, depending on its details. Dow Jones, which publishes the Journal, has said it has 'full confidence in the rigour and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit'. The courts may yet reject Trump's case. 'I don't think [Murdoch] will just flop over,' said Barber. 'The issue here is that Trump went around boasting that he killed the story … For an editor, that's very difficult. But I'm pretty damn confident there's no way [Tucker] would publish without having it properly sourced.'
Daily Mail
14 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Mom of teen dismembered on first date launches blistering tirade at killer over 'copycat' Netflix-style murder
The family of the teen dismembered on a first date in Wisconsin launched a foul-mouthed verbal attack on the convicted Netflix 'copycat' killer as he faced his sentence. Maxwell Anderson, the 34-year-old who was convicted of killing and dismembering 19-year-old Sade Robinson, was sentenced to life in prison on Friday as Robinson's family delivered painful impact statements. 'My daughter referred to you as a man, you never be a f***ing man, you're a p**** a** b****,' Robinson's mother Sheena Scarbrough told the courthouse, Fox 6 reported. The teenager was brutally murdered in April 2024 after going on a first date with Anderson just days after they met in a bar. The pair had spent the evening of their fateful date getting dinner and drinks at the Twisted Fisherman in Milwaukee before eventually going back to Anderson's apartment. At one point, Anderson turned on the Netflix series Love, Death & Robots. The show's Season 2 finale, 'The Drowned Giant,' depicts the gruesome dismantling of a gigantic human body on a beach. Prosecutors claimed that Anderson mutilated Robinson's body on a Wisconsin beach overlooking Lake Michigan - a jarring detail that was almost too much to stomach for the jury. Sade Robinson (pictured) was brutally murdered in April 2024 after going on a first date with Anderson just days after they met in a bar 'I was like... that's disgusting because that could have been where he got some of his ideas or fantasies,' juror Melissa Blascoe told the Milwaukee-Journal Sentinel. 'I physically felt like I was gonna throw up at that point. I know a lot of people were shaking and crying.' Anderson was also charged with arson and hiding a corpse in connection with her death. He was found guilty on all counts. Robinson's father, Carlos Robinson, said to Anderson in his statement: 'You deserve what you get. He deserves the punishment that he gave to my daughter.' The teen's sister, Adrianna Reams, said Anderson's brutal killing of her sister continues to haunt her. 'I cannot meet any person without the fear that they're going to harm or kill me because all my sister did was meet someone and, as a result, he ended her life,' she said. 'The only one who took that from her is the man sitting right there. I beg you to not... I beg you to not let this man have any type of parole.' Judge Laura Crivello said Anderson had told a pre-sentence investigator he regretted not walking the teen to her car because she was abducted outside his home. 'I did not commit these crimes. And so I plan to appeal these crimes, while I hope and pray that further investigations not only prove my innocence but find and deliver true justice,' Anderson said publicly, speaking on the case for the first time. 'I don't think you're remorseful in any way,' Crivello said, Fox 6 reported. Anderson's father, Steven Anderson, made an emotional statement, and said: 'To Sade's family, there are no words I can share that will reduce your pain. 'To Max... we want you to know that we love you and support your plans for self-improvement.' Robinson's mother added: 'I'm gonna respectfully request that you confess where the rest of my daughter's crown is... you've already done the worst. You can at least give us that much.' Investigators said that Anderson is believed to have spread her remains around Milwaukee County and burned her car to hide evidence. Disturbing images showed Robinson being groped by Anderson while she lay face down on his couch, and prosecutors said she was far too incapacitated to have resisted. One image shows Anderson holding Robinson's right breast as she lay unconscious. That breast would later be cut off her body. 'This is his trophy in a way,' Blascoe said about the images taken by Anderson. 'Those pictures will be in my mind for quite some time.' Surveillance video showed Robinson's car leaving the apartment in the early hours of April 2 before arriving at the beach along Lake Michigan shores. The young student's disappearance sparked concern when she didn't appear for work the next day. Her manager, Justin Romano, told CNN that Robinson was 'very outgoing, she would talk to everybody here. She was always there to lighten the mood.' Romano said her not showing up for work 'wasn't like her at all,' and added: 'We kind of knew something was up; we had been calling her all day.' Anderson is believed to have cut her body into pieces and burned her car behind an abandoned building before taking a bus back to his apartment. Within the car, despite 'extreme fire damage,' investigator's identified the outfit Robinson had been wearing on the night of the date as well as part of an iPhone consistent with hers burned in the car, CNN reported. Police then were called to Warnimont Park where a human leg, that appeared to have been 'sawn off' at the hip, was discovered. The leg was then identified as Robinson's. A 'confidential informant' claimed that Anderson had planned to kill Robinson weeks prior to her death, Fox News reported. Anderson's attorney, Tony Cotton, argued, however, that the prosecution showed no evidence of Anderson's intention to kill Robinson. Cotton also pointed out he made no attempt to conceal himself on public transport home, and was wearing clean clothes despite having allegedly cut up her body in a muddy park. Jurors reached their verdict within an hour on the ninth day of trial. 'While we are satisfied with this verdict, our hearts go out to the family of Sade Robinson,' Milwaukee County Assistant District Attorney Ian Vance-Curzan said.
Daily Mail
14 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Victims of killer self-driving Tesla on autopilot get a huge payout after four-year legal battle
A Miami jury has found Tesla was partly responsible for the 2019 crash of a self-driving vehicle that killed a woman and left her boyfriend badly injured to the tune of $242million in damages. Naibel Benavides Leon, 22, died after a Tesla Model S slammed in to her and boyfriend Dillon Angulo, then 27, in 2019. The couple had pulled over to look at the stars at the side of a road near Key Largo, Florida, when they were struck by the vehicle after driver George McGee took his eye off the road to reach for his phone. The federal jury held that Tesla bore significant responsibility because its technology failed and that not all the blame can be put on a reckless driver, even one who admitted he was distracted by his cellphone before hitting a young couple out gazing at the stars. The decision comes as Musk seeks to convince Americans his cars are safe enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service in several cities in the coming months. Footage from the Tesla's front camera showed McGee blow through a red light as he speeds down the road at nearly 70mph. The car passes a stop sign and crashes through several other road signs before striking the couple's vehicle, which was parked 40 feet off Card Sound Road by County Road 905. Benavides Leon was thrown 75 feet and died at the scene, while Angulo suffered serious injuries, according to a wrongful death lawsuit filed against Tesla by the woman's estate. The decision ends a four-year long case remarkable not just in its outcome but that it even made it to trial. Many similar cases against Tesla have been dismissed and, when that didn't happen, settled by the company to avoid the spotlight of a trial. 'This will open the floodgates,' said Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in the Tesla case. 'It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.' The case also included startling charges by lawyers for the family of Leon and for her injured boyfriend Angulo. They claimed Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. Tesla said it made a mistake after being shown the evidence and honestly hadn´t thought it was there. 'We finally learned what happened that night, that the car was actually defective,' said Benavides' sister, Neima Benavides. 'Justice was achieved.' The decision comes as Elon Musk (pictured) seeks to convince Americans his cars are safe enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service in several cities in the coming months Tesla has previously faced criticism that it is slow to cough up crucial data by relatives of other victims in Tesla crashes, accusations that the car company has denied. In this case, the plaintiffs showed Tesla had the evidence all along, despite its repeated denials, by hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up. 'Today´s verdict is wrong,' Tesla said in a statement, 'and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla´s and the entire industry´s efforts to develop and implement lifesaving technology,' They said the plaintiffs concocted a story 'blaming the car when the driver - from day one - admitted and accepted responsibility.' In addition to a punitive award of $200 million, the jury said Tesla must also pay $43 million of a total $129 million in compensatory damages for the crash, bringing the total borne by the company to $243 million. 'It's a big number that will send shock waves to others in the industry,' said financial analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. 'It's not a good day for Tesla.' Tesla said it will appeal. Even if that fails, the company says it will end up paying far less than what the jury decided because of a pre-trial agreement that limits punitive damages to three times Tesla´s compensatory damages. Translation: $172 million, not $243 million. But the plaintiff says their deal was based on a multiple of all compensatory damages, not just Tesla´s, and the figure the jury awarded is the one the company will have to pay. It´s not clear how much of a hit to Tesla´s reputation for safety the verdict in the Miami case will make. Tesla has vastly improved its technology since the crash on a dark, rural road in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019. But the issue of trust generally in the company came up several times in the case, including in closing arguments Thursday. The plaintiffs´ lead lawyer, Brett Schreiber, said Tesla´s decision to even use the term Autopilot showed it was willing to mislead people and take big risks with their lives because the system only helps drivers with lane changes, slowing a car and other tasks, falling far short of driving the car itself. Schreiber said other automakers use terms like 'driver assist' and 'copilot' to make sure drivers don´t rely too much on the technology. 'Words matter,' Schreiber said. 'And if someone is playing fast and lose with words, they´re playing fast and lose with information and facts.' Schreiber acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, was negligent when he blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a T-intersection at 62 miles an hour before slamming into a Chevrolet Tahoe that the couple had parked to get a look at the stars. The Tahoe spun around so hard it was able to launch Benavides 75 feet through the air into nearby woods where her body was later found. It also left Angulo, who walked into the courtroom Friday with a limp and cushion to sit on, with broken bones and a traumatic brain injury. But Schreiber said Tesla was at fault nonetheless. He said Tesla allowed drivers to act recklessly by not disengaging the Autopilot as soon as they begin to show signs of distraction and by allowing them to use the system on smaller roads that it was not designed for, like the one McGee was driving on. 'I trusted the technology too much,' said McGee at one point in his testimony. 'I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.' The lead defense lawyer in the Miami case, Joel Smith, countered that Tesla warns drivers that they must keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel yet McGee chose not to do that while he looked for a dropped cellphone, adding to the danger by speeding. Noting that McGee had gone through the same intersection 30 or 40 times previously and hadn´t crashed during any of those trips, Smith said that isolated the cause to one thing alone: 'The cause is that he dropped his cellphone.' The auto industry has been watching the case closely because a finding of Tesla liability despite a driver´s admission of reckless behavior would pose significant legal risks for every company as they develop cars that increasingly drive themselves.
