Barista’s Kohberger NIGHTMARE: “He Watched Me. He Knew My Shifts. Then He Said My Name.”
Barista’s Kohberger NIGHTMARE: “He Watched Me. He Knew My Shifts. Then He Said My Name.” Before Bryan Kohberger was arrested for the brutal murders of four University of Idaho students, there were warning signs—quiet, subtle, and deeply chilling. In this true crime episode, we dive into a newly unsealed police report revealing one of the most unsettling pre-crime encounters yet: Kohberger’s obsessive behavior toward a local barista. She never wore a name tag. Never introduced herself. And yet, Kohberger said her name like he’d always known it. This wasn’t just a creepy moment—it was the final crack in a pattern she’d been noticing for weeks. Kohberger came in almost daily, often right before closing. He never made small talk with other baristas. He only spoke to her. He asked about her psychology program. Referenced things she hadn’t shared. And he seemed to know exactly when she’d be working. Then came the comment that confirmed everything. After bringing in a female friend and prompting her to guess where the barista was from, Kohberger turned and said, “See, I told you she was smart.” A joke? Maybe. Or a glimpse into something far more sinister. In hindsight, she was being watched. Studied. Tracked. This episode walks you through the entire encounter—from routine coffee orders to a terrifying realization—layered with psychological analysis and forensic context. If you want to understand the mind of Kohberger before the crimes, this is where the mask first slipped. Subscribe now for more firsthand accounts, behavioral breakdowns, and exclusive access to hidden red flags that went unnoticed until it was too late. #BryanKohberger #IdahoMurders #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers #KohbergerTrial #TrueCrimePodcast #StalkingBehavior #BaristaStory #PsychologicalProfiling #CrimeBeforeTheCrime Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
2 Syys 12min
Donna Adelson Trial: Legal Expert Richard Shagrin Testifies on Donna’s Words and Intent
Donna Adelson Trial: Legal Expert Richard Shagrin Testifies on Donna’s Words and Intent In the Trial of Donna Adelson, the defense called Richard Shagrin, a seasoned legal expert, to the stand. His role wasn’t to rehash facts, but to lend the jury a professional lens through which to interpret Donna’s words, actions, and state of mind in the aftermath of Dan Markel’s murder. Shagrin, a respected criminal defense attorney with decades of courtroom experience, carefully walked jurors through how conversations and recorded statements might be understood in context. His testimony sought to counter the prosecution’s framing of Donna’s remarks on wiretaps and jailhouse communications—remarks that prosecutors argue show her involvement in the conspiracy. By presenting Shagrin, the defense aimed to show that the same words could be seen not as coded admissions of guilt, but as ambiguous phrases open to interpretation. Why does this testimony matter? In a case built largely on circumstantial evidence and conversations, intent is everything. If jurors accept the prosecution’s interpretation, Donna is cast as the matriarch who helped orchestrate her former son-in-law’s murder. But if they believe Shagrin’s framing, those same words could look more like the ramblings of a distressed mother reacting under pressure. His testimony didn’t just provide expert commentary—it gave the jury permission to question whether the state’s reading of Donna’s statements is the only reasonable one. This clip captures Shagrin’s full courtroom appearance, where law, language, and perception collide. His testimony underscores how critical context is in determining guilt or innocence—and how the defense is fighting to keep doubt alive in one of Florida’s most closely watched trials. #DonnaAdelsonTrial #RichardShagrin #LegalExpert #CourtroomTestimony #TrueCrime #DanMarkelCase #MurderForHire #DefenseWitness #AdelsonFamily #JusticeForDan Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
2 Syys 11min
Donna Adelson Trial: Digital Forensics Expert Breaks Down Donna & Charlie’s Call Records
Donna Adelson Trial: Digital Forensics Expert Breaks Down Donna & Charlie’s Call Records In this pivotal moment from the Trial of Donna Adelson, the defense introduced testimony from digital forensics expert Kelsey Guay, a former investigator with the Portland Police Bureau who has logged more than 400 hours of training in digital analysis, including 100 hours on cell-site location evidence. Her role was to take jurors deep into the world of call logs, data records, and phone analysis, giving the courtroom a technical yet critical perspective on Donna’s communications with her son, Charlie Adelson. The heart of her testimony revolved around Donna’s call patterns with Charlie, the son already convicted of orchestrating Dan Markel’s murder-for-hire. Prosecutors have long argued that suspicious timing and frequency of calls between mother and son reflect coordination, while the defense countered with Guay’s expert lens to suggest alternative explanations or reasonable doubt. Why does this testimony matter? Because in the absence of a smoking gun, the state leans heavily on circumstantial evidence—particularly Donna’s phone activity. Guay’s testimony potentially reshapes how jurors interpret that digital trail: were Donna’s calls a sign of conspiracy, or the normal communication of a worried mother deeply entangled in family stress? Her credentials lent weight to her analysis, but the cross-examination loomed large, pressing the question of whether forensics can truly capture intent. The result: a layered and technical testimony that left jurors with more to consider about the role Donna’s conversations with Charlie played in this tragic saga. This raw courtroom footage captures Guay’s testimony in full—watch closely as the digital breadcrumbs of the case are laid bare for the jury, piece by piece, in a trial where every call, text, and connection could sway the final verdict. #DonnaAdelsonTrial #DigitalForensics #CallRecords #CharlieAdelson #DanMarkelCase #TrueCrime #CourtroomDrama #ExpertWitness #MurderForHire #JusticeForDan Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
2 Syys 56min
Donna Adelson Trial: Judge Denies Motion for Acquittal, Case Moves Forward
Donna Adelson Trial: Judge Denies Motion for Acquittal, Case Moves Forward In a critical moment in the Trial of Donna Adelson, defense attorney Josh Zelman filed a motion for judgment of acquittal, arguing that prosecutors had failed to provide direct evidence linking Donna Adelson to the murder-for-hire plot that took the life of law professor Dan Markel. It was a bold move—one that, if granted, would have ended the trial immediately and cleared Donna of the charges. But Judge Stephen Everett was quick to shut that door, ruling that the state had provided enough evidence for a reasonable jury to consider. In courtroom terms, this was a decisive victory for the prosecution, ensuring the trial would move into the defense’s case rather than collapsing midstream. Why does this moment matter? Motions for acquittal are standard procedure, but they often signal the defense’s strategy and confidence in poking holes in the state’s case. The denial reinforces the fact that prosecutors have laid enough groundwork—through wiretaps, financial records, and family dynamics—to justify moving forward. For jurors, it underscores that the evidence, though circumstantial, is still strong enough to be weighed carefully. The clip captures the judge’s ruling in real time, marking a turning point in the trial. The defense may continue to argue that the evidence is too thin, but as of now, the jury will hear their side fully—and Donna Adelson will remain squarely in the hot seat as her fate hangs in the balance. #DonnaAdelsonTrial #DanMarkelCase #JudgeEverett #CourtroomDrama #TrueCrime #AdelsonFamily #MurderForHire #TrialUpdates #JusticeForDan #LegalDrama Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872
2 Syys 10min
