Editor’s note: This editorial was published by The Lewiston Tribune and written by Tribune Opinion page editor Marty Trillhaase.
Idaho has made some progress since the days when the cost of prosecuting a murder trial — especially a death penalty case — could overwhelm a small, rural county’s budget.
But the misfortune of being at the center of a horrific crime still carries with it an extra financial hit on the people who live in that jurisdiction.
Case in point: Latah County’s trial of Bryan Kohberger.
Kohberger faces four counts of first-degree murder and one count of burglary in the November stabbing deaths of University of Idaho students Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin.
Since there is no eyewitness to the homicides, the case against Kohberger rests with circumstantial evidence.
Under a gag order, Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson has little to say about what to expect. But the initial police report released upon Kohberger’s arrest suggests he will build his case based on:
Data linked to Kohberger’s cellphone.
Evidence taken from the crime scene.
The medical examinations.
DNA evidence.
Electronic data from sources such as cameras.
Some of the expertise to collect that evidence and then explain it back to a jury may be available from in-house talent or from Latah County’s state and federal law enforcement partners. But it’s just as likely that Thompson will need professional help from outside.
For example, downloading and analyzing electronic data require a specialist. During the murder trials of Demetri and Clyde Ewing, for example, Nez Perce County prosecutors relied on such talent to isolate recorded conversations from background noises
It means bringing expert witnesses to testify, paying for their time, providing transcripts and preparing exhibits.
Last week, Thompson delivered the bill to the county commissioners — $135,000, an increase from the $15,000 the prosecutor’s office typically spends in a year.
“It’s hard to project exactly what’s going to be involved,” Thompson said. “We know that it’s not going to be cheap. ... We need to make sure that we don’t cut corners on anything with regard to making sure this case is handled properly.”
If he needs more, he’ll get it. Commissioner Kathie LaFortune was willing to up the ante to $150,000.
And that’s only the cost of prosecution.
Idaho is transitioning toward a state-supported system of public defenders. But it’s not there yet.
For instance, the state program now covers $351,498 of the Nez Perce County public defense bill. Throw in another $245,154 in state sales tax dollars allocated toward that program. That still leaves Nez Perce County $1.3 million short.
And although a pooled county program will cover the bulk of what it costs to provide a second state-certified defender in a death penalty case, the local county must pay the first $10,000.
Following the Nez Perce County example, next year’s anticipated bill drops to about $526,981 with the state providing $557,558 from the public defense commission and another $980,619 coming from sales taxes.
Starting in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, 2024, public defense will be provided entirely by the state.
Solving the inequity between small and larger counties when it comes to providing criminal defense to indigents is a big step forward, but it is only part of the solution.
Idaho counties operate under a series of state-imposed spending caps. To come up with $135,000 or $150,000 more to cover a prosecutor’s trial expenses likely means doing without something else — fewer new hires, putting up with older squad cars or deferring maintenance. It goes without saying that such financial pressures can lead to different outcomes depending on the location of the crime.
Criminal defendants are prosecuted in the name of the state. Isn’t it time the state lends more of a hand?
