Bryan Kohberger case: Idaho makes key move on firing squad executions
Idaho lawmakers have advanced a bill to make the state's newly revived firing squad its main method of execution as the quadruple murder trial of aspiring criminologist and alleged co-ed killer Bryan Kohberger approaches.
The bill, H0037, has advanced to the Idaho House floor after clearing the Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee Tuesday.
Bill sponsor Rep. Bruce Skaug, who previously pushed for legislation that restored the firing squad as a backup option to lethal injection, argued that the botched lethal injection of condemned serial killer Thomas Eugene Creech last year highlights problems with that method.
Idaho Beefs Up Firing Squad As Bryan Kohberger Trial Nears
Creech was first sentenced to death for the murders of John Wayne Bradford and Edward Thomas Arnold in 1974. He was hitchhiking when the two picked him up. Then he shot them from behind.
He escaped death in that case when courts found the state's old sentencing law to be unconstitutional and his punishment was commuted to life in prison. But then he crushed another inmate's skull with a sock full of batteries and returned to death row in 1983 for the murder of David Dale Jensen.
Read On The Fox News App
Follow The Fox True Crime Team On X
He had previously been acquitted of the murder of Paul Schrader, 70, in Tucson, Arizona. However, investigators still think he was the killer. He's been convicted of five slayings altogether in Idaho, Oregon and California. He made dozens of additional confessions, although authorities say he is suspected of only six of those slayings.
"I, along with many others, believe the firing squad is more certain, has less appellate issues, and is more humane than other forms of execution," Skaug told Fox News Digital last month.
Idaho Serial Killer Survives Lethal Injection Attempt, Prompting Renewed Push For Firing Squad
Creech was the fourth condemned inmate in the U.S. to survive his scheduled lethal injection in just a few years. The method spiraled into chaos after 2009, when the last American manufacturer of one of three drugs used in a lethal cocktail closed down, making it difficult for states to obtain. Its leading remaining manufacturer, an Italian company, opposes the death penalty.
One of the country's leading experts on capital punishment, Fordham University professor Deborah Denno, has also argued that the firing squad is an effective and humane method of execution.
SIGN UP TO GET True Crime Newsletter
"We've had three modern firing squad executions, and they have gone off as intended, and the inmate has died quickly and with dignity," she said after Creech's failed execution. "So, I think that is something to emphasize."
Idaho's Move To Resurrect Firing Squad 'Makes Sense' As 'Quickest, Surest' Death Penalty Option, Expert Says
The new legislation will make the firing squad the primary means of execution, rather than a backup, as Idaho and other states continue to struggle with implementing lethal injections and obtaining the drugs to perform them. The proposed Idaho firing squad would be "mechanized" and automated, according to the Idaho Capital Sun.
"At first when you hear firing squad, if you're not familiar with the history, you think 'well that sounds barbaric' is what I've heard from some," Skaug told colleagues during a hearing earlier this week, according to the paper. "It is certain. It is quick. And it brings justice for the victims and their families in a more expeditious manner than other types."
GET REAL-TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE True Crime Hub
The bill advances as prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Kohberger in the stabbing deaths of four University of Idaho students: 21-year-olds Madison Mogen and Kaylee Goncalves and 20-year-olds Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin.
Click Here For The Fox News App
His trial is scheduled for later this year. He faces four charges of first-degree murder and another charge of felony burglary.
A judge entered not guilty pleas on his behalf at his arraignment.Original article source: Bryan Kohberger case: Idaho makes key move on firing squad executions
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Judge sides with Trump DOJ to keep Mahmoud Khalil in detention
Judge sides with Trump DOJ to keep Mahmoud Khalil in detention Show Caption Hide Caption Supporters protest for Mahmoud Khalil's release from ICE detention Supporters demanded the release of Mahmoud Khalil while he attended a hearing at the LaSalle Immigration Court in Jena, Louisiana. A federal judge ruled the Trump administration could keep Mahmoud Khalil in custody under a secondary legal argument. On June 13, U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz, of New Jersey, rejected the 30-year-old Palestinian Columbia University graduate's request to be released after three months in immigration detention. On June 11, Farbiarz initially ruled Khalil couldn't be detained by Secretary of State Marco Rubio's determination that he threatened American foreign policy interests. But Farbiarz left open other options for Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hold Khalil. Ahead of a court-ordered deadline to respond on June 13, Justice Department lawyers argued Khalil could be held for misrepresenting information on his permanent residency application, under a federal immigration statute lawyers have presented to the court. "Khalil is now detained based on that other charge of removability," Justice Department lawyers wrote in a June 13 letter submitted to court. "Detaining Khalil based on that other ground of removal is lawful." They said Khalil now has options to seek his release with the charge pending. Farbiarz sided with that assessment and said the secondary charge hasn't been blocked by the court. He said, "a number of avenues are now available to" Khalil, "including a bail application to the immigration judge presiding over the immigration case." Khalil's lawyer, Amy Greer, said that the government was using 'cruel, transparent delay tactics' to keep him away from his wife and newborn son on their first Father's Day, on June 15. 'Instead of celebrating together, he is languishing in ICE detention as punishment for his advocacy on behalf of his fellow Palestinians,' Greer said in a statement. The Justice Department had no comment beyond the filings, an agency spokesperson said in an email. The government had until June 13 to appeal the judge's initial ruling. Justice Department lawyers pushed Khalil to follow the administrative actions instead of filing in federal court. "These administrative processes are the proper avenues for Khalil to seek release, not having a federal district court hold that the government cannot detain Khalil on a charge that the Court never found to be unlawful," the government lawyers said in the letter. In his original June 11 ruling, Farbiarz Khalil's request to temporarily block federal officials from deporting him under Rubio's determination. On June 13, he extended the government's time to respond to appeal his decision. Justice Department lawyers instead brought up the second argument. Khalil's legal team sent a letter to Farbiarz the morning of June 13, requesting that the client be freed since the appeal from the government did not meet the morning deadline. Khalil has been held in an immigration detention center in Louisiana since March. His lawyers have fought for his release to be with his wife and newborn son, Deen. However, a June 12 email sent to Khalil's lawyers by Brian Acuna, director of the New Orleans ICE Field Office, stated that he had "no information [that] your client will be released or a time for that," court records showed. His lawyers instead needed to contact ICE's Office of Chief Counsel on that matter, the email said. Immigration agents arrested Khalil, a green card holder married to an American citizen, on March 8 in the lobby of his university-owned apartment building in Manhattan. A Palestinian born in Syria, Khalil was a spokesman and negotiator for pro-Palestinian protesters at Columbia. Khalil was not accused of any crime. Noncitizens can be deported if the Secretary of State finds that their presence threatens U.S. foreign policy interests, even if their beliefs, statements or associations are "otherwise lawful," the Trump administration argued. They cited a rarely used provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 as the basis. Farbiarz ruled against the Secretary of State's determination and said the secondary argument — that he omitted information on his application to enter the country — "almost surely flows" from Rubio's determination. On June 13, Farbiarz said Khalil hadn't given factual evidence as to why it could be unlawful to detain him on the secondary charge.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Mass. Rep. Lynch calls for Trump's DHS chief to face Congress over senator who was detained
Top Democrats on the powerful U.S. House Oversight Committee are calling for President Donald Trump's homeland security secretary to appear before Congress to explain why federal agents detained a U.S. senator from California. And they want her hit with a subpoena if she does not agree to appear voluntarily, they said. U.S. Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-8th District, the panel's acting ranking Democrat, was among the lawmakers who made that request in a letter to U.S. Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., who chairs the committee. Video of Padilla, the Golden State's senior U.S. senator, being forcibly removed from a news conference held by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem went viral on Thursday, provoking outrage among his fellow Democrats. The videos showed officers aggressively pushing Padilla out of Noem's news conference in a Los Angeles federal building and eventually restraining him on the floor outside the room. He was later released and not charged. '... We were disturbed to witness another shocking escalation of executive overreach by the Trump administration. While attempting to ask a question at a Department of Homeland Security press conference in Los Angeles, multiple videos show several seemingly unidentified plainclothes men whom we assume to be DHS agents violently push and pull Senator Padilla out of the room where the press conference was being held,' the lawmakers wrote in part. 'Once outside of the room, video shows agents—in this case, wearing FBI insignia — roughly push Senator Padilla to the ground in the hallway, twist his arms behind his back, and handcuff him," they continued. The letter calls on Comer to 'demand by June 14, 2025, that Secretary Noem appear before the Committee. If the Secretary does not commit by June 21, 2025, to such testimony, we urge you to issue a subpoena to compel her appearance before the Committee to answer to Congress and the American people.' Padilla has strongly denied the White House's claims, led by Noem, that he crashed the news conference and was initially believed to be a security threat. Videos show Padilla introducing himself and trying to ask a question before he was confronted by federal agents. The altercation came just days after U.S. Rep. LaMonica McIver was indicted on federal charges alleging she assaulted and interfered with immigration officers outside a detention center in New Jersey. In addition to Lynch, Democratic U.S. Reps. Maxwell Alejandro Frost, of Florida, and Summer Lee, of Pennsylvania, also signed the letter to Comer. 'This shocking encounter adds to a litany of alarming moves by the Trump administration to seize and abuse power, including by turning the military on the American people,' Lynch, of South Boston, and his colleagues wrote to Comer. 'The Trump administration has mobilized the military to the streets of an American city, and any other city could be next. The Trump Administration has violently tackled, kneeled on, and handcuffed a sitting U.S. senator, and any other American could be next,' they continued. 'The American people have questions, and we hope you will join us in bringing these dictatorial actions to account.' Associated Press reports are included in this story. Troops in the Streets, Questions in Congress: Mass. reckons with role of military in civil society Judge says Trump illegally deployed National Guard to help with LA protests, must return control to California Harvard researcher released from custody after months in detention President Donald Trump approval rating: Poll finds new low for Trump Here's who polling says is winning the fight between Trump and Newsom Read the original article on MassLive.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Anti-ICE rioters are just as out of line as anti-black racists in ‘62
On Sept. 30, 1962, the University of Mississippi experienced a 'mostly peaceful' demonstration. As with all such protests, it was peaceful until it wasn't — it became a riot, and a particularly heinous and destructive one. The mob attacked federal officers, including border-patrol agents, with rocks and Molotov cocktails. They burned cars. They smashed street lights. They ransacked buildings. They drove vehicles at the officers. And they did it all to try to prevent the federal government from enforcing the law. This, discerning readers will realize, was the notorious Battle of Oxford, when students at Ole Miss and outside agitators exploded in fury to prevent the enrollment of James Meredith, an African-American, who was under the protection of federal agents. President John Kennedy had federalized the Mississippi National Guard days before the disturbance, and sent in the Army when things got out of hand. Eventually, he drew on 31,000 troops, a necessary exercise of overwhelming force. Now, once again, mobs are in the streets in opposition to federal power and federal law. We are probably at the beginning stages of another titanic struggle over whether the writ of federal law will run in jurisdictions opposed to it, and over the morality of those underlying laws. To use a term borrowed from segregationists in Virginia the 1950s, the opponents of ICE are engaged in a campaign of 'massive resistance.' Virginia Democrat Harry Byrd and his allies came up with an across-the-board strategy to undermine Brown v. Board of Education. 'If we can organize the Southern States for massive resistance to this order,' Byrd said, 'I think that in time the rest of the country will realize that racial integration is not going to be accepted in the South.' Similarly, Democratic officeholders and activists hope to make ICE raids so politically toxic and so painful to implement that the federal government stands down and accepts the status quo of routine lawlessness. Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters The opposition is relying on a version of another doctrine of the Southern resisters, nullification. This is the idea that states can invalidate federal laws that they deem an offense against our constitutional order. This notion has a long, undistinguished history in this country as a pre-cursor to the Civil War and, later, as a tool to attempt to preserve segregation. Although it is most associated with the South, other parts of the country have tried to resort to it, as well. Now progressive cities and states are joining the list. They have no equivalent of John C. Calhoun, the brilliant, if catastrophically wrong, South Carolina statesman who developed a sophisticated defense of the concept. Instead, they want de facto nullification, or nullification as a practical matter rather than a theory. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has been quite clear about this. 'We need to stop the raids,' she insists. 'The only thing it does is contribute to chaos.' Her attitude would take Los Angeles well beyond its status as a sanctuary city, which involves not affirmatively cooperating with the feds, and make it something else — effectively a no-go zone for immigration officers and a jurisdiction that affirmatively resists them. Of course, the anti-ICE resistance would reject any association with the massive resistance of yore, arguing that its cause is just, in contrast to the segregationist South. But violent opposition to law-enforcement officers acting within their lawful powers is deeply wrong, whatever the underlying cause (and mass illegal immigration imposes significant costs on our society). If enforcing our laws is offensive to progressives, they should seek to change the statutes in question and to pass a large-scale amnesty, rather than relying on a rioter's veto to dictate what ICE agents can do and where they can go. Violent mobs have no legitimate part to play in our democratic republic, not in Oxford, Miss., in 1962, not in Los Angeles, Calif., or anywhere else inspired by its sordid example in 2025. Twitter: @RichLowry
