Idaho v Keller - Pretrial Hearing

I attended a pretrial hearing for Idaho v Keller. This is another part of the legal proceedings surrounding the KCRCC town hall that was disrupted last year. Keller is also being charged with misdemeanor battery. He was not a part of the security at the town hall.

The CDA prosecuting attorney started by saying that the other activity involving borrenphol as the town hall shouldn't be mentioned. He also stated that this case isn't about politics. 🤣

He further stated that he doesn't want any witnesses or the victim labeled as activists. He goes on to state that Sheriff Norris is not relevant to this case.

Mr. Palmer, Keller's lawyer, speaks and asked the judge to clarify his comment on self defense. He stated that the other activity at the town hall should be mentioned. If the other stuff hadn't happened then we all wouldn't be in court. Palmer then goes on to explain to Judge Poorman the layout of the auditorium and where Keller was in relation to Norris, etc.

Next there was back and forth between Hunter and Palmer about if Sheriff Norris was a background player or not. Palmer states that it is on Hunter to prove that Keller acted wrong. Hunter is chastised by the judge for referencing the prior Borrenphol trial.

Hunter states again that he doesn't want Kuntz to be labeled an activist. (She literally is, in my opinion.) Palmer disagrees saying that it can be inferred that Kuntz's actions were on purpose. Hunter again expresses his displeasure with Palmer saying Kuntz is an activist.

A technical issue with the recording of the audio for transcripts happened so we all moved to another courtroom. Once in the new courtroom, Judge Poorman lets both lawyers know that this case could get bumped back to mid-July.

Hunter states that Palmer is accusing him of being politically motivated and biased. Palmer states that he is not sure how Hunter came to that conclusion. Palmer says he can question the motives of the witnesses.

Now on to a discussion as to if the Idaho Attorney General's letter regarding Sheriff Norris pertains to this case. Palmer thinks it does due to it being an opinion of the state and the city prosecutor is a sub-division of the state. Hunter states that the letter is heresay. He also states that the KCRCC is irrelevant to this case. The judge states that opening statements are open to what the lawyers want to say. Political bias or affiliation may or may not pertain depending on how it is presented. Judge Poorman says that the term activist can be used.

Hearing ended. Next hearing is 8 am on February, 2nd.