Man Accused of Killing University of Idaho Students Has ‘Autism’ Defense

The murder of a group of students from the University of Idaho sent shockwaves throughout the nation. People were following the story and its grisly details.

In time, an arrest was made and all seemed right in the world, with the exception of the professor who a TikTok “psychic” claimed was behind the killing–that’s a different case entirely, but one worth reading up on if you’re bored.

Now, as the accused killer faces trial, his defense team is scrambling.

I get the feeling that this particular defense is something of a Hail Mary.

Bryan Kohberger has autism, according to his lead defense lawyer, who is arguing the diagnosis means he should not face the possibility of the death penalty if he is convicted of the murders of a group of University of Idaho students who were killed in a 4 a.m. home invasion attack in November 2022.

“Bryan C. Kohberger, by and through his attorneys of record… hereby moves this Court to strike the death penalty as a sentencing option in his case because Mr. Kohberger’s autism spectrum disorder (ASD) reduces his culpability, negates the retributive and deterrent purposes of capital punishment, and exposes him to the unacceptable risk that he will be wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death,” Anne Taylor wrote in a newly unsealed, 28-page court filing.

She argued that repetitive behaviors such as rocking in place or Kohberger’s failure to make eye contact would be perceived by jurors as “strange, out-of-control, and even disrespectful of such a solemn proceeding” or interpreted as guilt or shame. She said her client had been examined by Dr. Rachel Orr, who found that Kohberger’s autism has a “significant impact on his daily life.”

Now, I’m not an expert on autism by any stretch of the imagination. My daughter was recently diagnosed with it, but that was just a few weeks ago and my wife and I are still learning about the condition.

What I do know, though, is that while I can see how the jury might interpret some of those behaviors as disrespectful and bizarre under the circumstances, I do think that can be dealt with simply by noting this in the jury instructions, that this should be about the evidence itself and that the defendant has autism and this is just a normal part of that condition.

Especially if he’s someone who has something like level 2 autism, which is more severe than what used to be called Asperger’s Syndrome, but isn’t quite at the most severe level where some people never can live on their own.

But autism doesn’t mean you don’t understand the ramifications of your actions. An autistic person might lag a bit in social development, but they can still understand right and wrong, which means they’re still culpable for their actions.

Further, the “deterrent purposes of capital punishment” isn’t in deterring the person being punished, but as a warning to others that this is what you face if you commit cold-blooded murder. Now, I have issues with capital punishment, but mostly because I distrust the state will always get it right, and while you can release an innocent man from prison, you can’t unkill them.

But for someone like this, especially if there’s really no doubt at all that he did it, I’m not going to lose a moment’s sleep that whoever committed the absolute atrocity that took place in that apartment has essentially been tossed out of this world once and for all.

Autism doesn’t change any of that.

What I worry about is that if this is remotely successful, we’ll see evil people who also have autism decide they don’t need to worry about potential punishment because of their condition and then follow through with the evil deeds their hearts have always desired to do.

Autistic people aren’t incapable of understanding right and wrong. Their developmental issues are quite different from what we at least used to call mental redardation, which might actually mean someone isn’t responsible for their actions for some reason.

And I don’t like the precedent this could set if it’s successful.