The family of one of the University of Idaho victims is challenging a gag order that was placed on the case last month.
As previously reported, four University of Idaho students — Ethan Chapin, Xana Kernodle, Madison Mogen, and Kaylee Goncalves — were found stabbed to death at their off-campus rented home on Nov. 13th in Moscow, Idaho.
Weeks after the murders, a suspect — Bryan Kohberger — was arrested in late December. Shortly thereafter, a local judge in the Moscow area applied a gag order to the case.
“On January 3, 2023, Latah County Magistrate Judge Megan Marshall issued a nondissemination order in regard to the murder case against Bryan C. Kohberger,” Moscow police said in a statement at the time.
“The order prohibits any communication by investigators, law enforcement personnel, attorneys, and agents of the prosecuting attorney or defense attorney concerning this case,” the statement continued.
Fast-forwarding to the present, on Friday the attorney representing victim Kaylee Goncalves’ family filed a motion challenging the gag order.
The attorney for Idaho victim Kaylee Goncalves’ family is challenging the judge’s gag order.
He says: “It would place an undue burden on the Victims’ families if the attorney whom they have retained to represent their interests was prohibited from serving as their spokesperson.” pic.twitter.com/ea2cNoGAp3
— Brian Entin (@BrianEntin) February 3, 2023
Seen above, the motion makes the case that the gag order should only apply to the relevant parties involved in the people — the “People” writ large and the “Defendant.”
“The only ‘parties’ to the case are the People and the Defendant. Accordingly, as a non-party citizens, the Victims surviving family members are free to speak to the public and the media under the First Amendment to the Constitution,” the motion reads.
“Simply put, their rights to freedom of speech cannot be restricted through a judicial prior restraint. Gentile makes clear that only the rights of attorneys who are actively engaged in litigating a pending matter can be restricted without satisfying the rigorous prior restraints standard set forth in Nebraska Press Association v Stuart,” it continues.
Gentile is a reference to a 1991 case.
“[T]he U.S. Supreme Court in 1991 ruled in favor of attorney Dominic Gentile who had been disciplined by the State Bar of Nevada for violating a rule of professional conduct when making statements to the press,” according to Middle Tennessee State University’s First Amendment Encyclopedia.
“The court in a narrow decision found Nevada’s law too vague. Lawyers don’t forfeit all rights of free speech as members of a profession, but courts have ruled they can be limited in certain ways, most notably in what they say inside a courtroom,” the encyclopedia notes.
The Supreme Court specifically ruled that Gentile wasn’t violating the relevant gag order by relaying to the media the thoughts of his clients.
Similarly, attorney Shanon Gray argues in the motion that he should be allowed to relay to the media the thoughts of Goncalves’ family without violating the gag order.
“As attorney for one of the Victim’s families, I am allowed to relay to the media any of
the opinions, views, or statements of those family members regarding any part of the case (as they are allowed to speak about the case under the First Amendment),” he wrote.
“This is different from offering up my own opinion regarding the facts and issues
surrounding the case. It would place an undue burden on the Victims’ families if the attorney whom they have retained to represent their interests was prohibited from serving as their spokesperson (conduit) to the media and other parties in transmitting the Victims’ families thoughts and opinions,” he added.
From the looks of it, the public’s reaction to Gray’s motion is mixed. Some argue that Gonclaves’ family is jeopardizing the case:
I hope Mr Goncalves doesn’t throw the case and by his actions cause Brian Kohberger to walk free.
If that happens then I don’t want to hear another word outta him.
If the judge and detectives want the gag order then let them have it. Patience is a virtue!
— SMHonk (@SMHonk1983) February 4, 2023
They are not only insisting to jeopardize the integrity of the case for their daughter, but for the 3 other innocent victims. They need to just stop! I would be upset if I were the other parents having to deal with these that are so outspoken.
— Diane Ellis-Wurster (@toodles521) February 3, 2023
You would think they’d want to cooperate with the gag order in order to not jeopardize the case- The other parents don’t have a problem with it.
— MaryAnne (@MaryanneY10) February 4, 2023
But others say they have the right to be as outspoken as they desire:
I feel awful for their parents. They’ve suffered enough. Let them have what they’re asking for at this point. To keep their children’s memories and this case alive and in the public. We can’t forget. #IdahoFour #Idaho4 #IdahoStudents @CoffindafferFBI @901Lulu
— DIANNE (@onceatweeter) February 4, 2023
Reading the comments n I’m actually shocked. Some people are so insensitive. They have rights to speak they were silenced from the beginning and something people keep forgetting THEY NEVER ASKED FOR THIS TO HAPPEN. THEY JUST WANT THE TRUTH TF
— carti (@carti777) February 3, 2023
a bunch of folks who didnt lose a love one..sitting behind a pc screen saying rather a family should be gagged or not..they should not be gagged they have every right to be vocal
— hey (@tgrfan42069) February 3, 2023
DONATE TO AMERICAN WIRE
If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to American Wire News to help us fight them.
- Nashville shooter was reportedly being counseled by pastor whose daughter she killed - March 30, 2023
- ‘Five million is nothing’: Activists demand MUCH more from California Reparations Task Force - March 30, 2023
- ‘I’m giving you actual facts’: Candace Owens flips the script on leftist professor debating affirmative action - March 30, 2023
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.