By Melissa Davlin, president
It’s been nearly three years since reporters in Idaho first started covering the horrific murders of four University of Idaho students, but the conversation over what information should be public, and how journalists should cover it, continues.
On Aug. 18, the City of Moscow said it would pause releasing additional images related to the Kohberger investigation after one of the victims’ mothers petitioned the court for an injunction and temporary restraining order on photos, video, or audio related to Madison Mogen’s bedroom. Second District Judge Megan Marshall issued the temporary restraining order, saying unreleased body cam footage from the crime scene could constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. Previous records releases included blurred images of Mogen’s bedroom, part of the scene of the quadruple homicide in November 2022.
Though the TRO applies only to Mogen’s bedroom, the City of Moscow said it will refrain from releasing any photos or videos from inside the victims’ home until the issue is resolved in court. That hearing is scheduled for Thursday, Aug. 21.
For most of the last three years, journalists have worked to get information to the public while investigators, attorneys, and others connected to the case were under a nondissemination order, also known as a gag order, that prevented them from speaking to the media.
That order remained in place through two and a half years of hearings and filings, up until July, when defendant Bryan Kohberger changed his plea to guilty a month before the trial was set to begin.
This summer, the Idaho Press Club joined a media coalition to request Judge Steven Hippler lift the nondissemination order. A separate filing asked Hippler to unseal documents. Stoel Rives represented the coalition, which included regional and national outlets. Our argument: With a guilty plea, there is no Sixth Amendment concern for a fair trial to outweigh the media’s First Amendment right to cover the crime and the crucial public safety questions surrounding the investigation.
A week before sentencing, Hippler agreed to vacate the nondissemination order, but declined to hear the motion to unseal documents. Hippler said he wanted to review each document before unsealing them and said he would unseal those documents in batches after the period for appeals ends. (Though Kohberger had agreed not to appeal when he accepted the plea deal, he could still do so up to 42 days after the July 23 sentencing.)
The Sixth Amendment isn’t the only consideration, though. The August petition from Mogen’s mother raises questions on victims’ privacy vs public interest. The Kohberger investigation isn’t the first time this has come up — just two years ago, we heard similar debates over testimony and coverage during the Vallow trial, and we hosted a panel discussion on how to interview victims and families during one of our training events. This week, we’ll watch the Aug. 21st hearing with interest, and we’ll continue fostering conversations on accessing information while balancing coverage and sensitivity.
