Bryan Kohberger, who pleaded guilty to murdering four University of Idaho students and accepted four consecutive life sentences, now claims he was "convinced to falsely confess", and an Idaho judge has given him two days in court to make that case.

Judge Steven Hippler issued an order setting a status conference for June 3, 2027, and an evidentiary hearing for June 17, 2027, after Kohberger filed a handwritten petition for post-conviction relief. Prosecutors had asked Hippler to dismiss the petition outright, without any hearing at all. Fox News Digital reported the judge declined that request.

The ruling keeps alive a legal bid that, if successful, could reopen one of the most closely watched murder cases in recent memory, and potentially expose Kohberger to the death penalty he avoided by cutting a deal in the first place.

Kohberger admitted guilt in open court, then reversed course a year later

In July 2025, Kohberger stood before Judge Hippler and pleaded guilty to the November 2022 murders of Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin, four University of Idaho students killed in an off-campus house on King Road in Moscow, Idaho. The plea deal spared him from a potential death sentence. In exchange, Kohberger waived his right to appeal.

Hippler sentenced him to four consecutive terms of life without the possibility of parole, plus an additional ten years.

A year later, Kohberger reversed himself. On July 27, 2026, he filed a handwritten petition for post-conviction relief, proclaiming his innocence and asking to withdraw the guilty plea. That petition accused his own defense team, attorneys Anne Taylor, Elisa Massoth, and Bicka Barlow, of convincing him to "falsely confess."

Kohberger's petition alleged that his lawyers failed to inform him of what he called "exculpatory discovery." Specifically, he pointed to hair found at the crime scene that was never tested for DNA. A physical analysis had excluded the hair as Kohberger's, but no DNA test was performed.

The New York Post reported that Kohberger's handwritten affidavit went further, alleging "coercion, disinformation, false promises, and the withholding of exculpatory discovery" by his former legal team. Among the claims: his lawyers buried evidence of "clumps of unknown hair found in Ethan Chapin's hands" and fabricated horror stories about death row to pressure him into the deal.

Kohberger's own words contradict the plea he entered under oath

Kohberger did not leave much ambiguity about his position. In his petition, he wrote that his "actual innocence is my truth" and that the plea, "hinged on by false promises and blatant disinformation, MUST be withdrawn." He told the New York Times, "A lot went wrong in those plea discussions. I really do want to be heard."

Those statements sit in direct tension with his courtroom conduct. As Breitbart reported, Kohberger verbally confirmed his guilt when the judge asked him directly during the plea hearing, the standard exchange in which a defendant tells a judge, under oath, that he committed the crimes.

Waiving his right to appeal, however, did not block Kohberger from seeking post-conviction relief. Under Idaho law, a post-conviction petition is a separate legal track. If Kohberger persuades the court that his plea was involuntary or that his counsel was ineffective, the case could be reopened. A new trial is among the possible outcomes.

And a new trial would carry a consequence Kohberger already negotiated away once: the death penalty would be back on the table. The original plea deal removed that possibility. Withdrawing the plea would erase the deal's protections along with its obligations. In a state where capital punishment remains a live issue, that is not a theoretical risk.

Prosecutors wanted the petition thrown out, the judge said no

Idaho prosecutors pushed to end Kohberger's bid before it started. They asked Judge Hippler to dismiss the petition without holding a hearing, arguing, in substance, that Kohberger had already had his day in court and accepted the outcome.

Hippler disagreed. His order, dated last Wednesday, scheduled both a status conference and a full evidentiary hearing. The decision means Kohberger will have the chance to present evidence and testimony supporting his claims that his former lawyers misled him.

Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador signaled that his office would not back down. Shortly after Kohberger filed his petition, Labrador told Fox News Digital his office is "ready to do whatever is necessary to ensure justice is fully carried out."

Kohberger has been appointed a new attorney for the post-conviction proceedings. That attorney did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment. But a separate civil attorney, Jason Goldman, issued a statement framing the judge's decision as a vindication.

Goldman told reporters:

"Today's decision is an important step toward ensuring that the concerning circumstances surrounding Bryan's plea receive the renewed judicial scrutiny they deserve... we would simply caution against assuming that everything the public believes it knows about this case tells the complete story. Stay tuned."

A former defense expert added fuel by claiming buried evidence

Kohberger's petition is not the only source of friction. Sy Ray, a former expert witness who worked for Kohberger's original defense team, recently alleged that additional damaging evidence existed that investigators had not introduced before the guilty plea. The specifics of Ray's claims were not detailed in public reporting, but his assertion tracks with Kohberger's broader accusation that his defense team withheld material information.

Forensic psychologist Dr. Kris Mohandie, described as a renowned expert in the field, had predicted that Kohberger would attempt to challenge his guilty plea. Mohandie characterized Kohberger as a narcissist, a profile, in his assessment, consistent with someone who would accept a deal to avoid the worst outcome and then try to unwind it once the immediate pressure lifted.

The pattern Mohandie described is not unfamiliar in high-profile criminal cases. Defendants accept plea agreements under the weight of overwhelming evidence and the shadow of maximum penalties, then file post-conviction petitions claiming coercion or ineffective counsel. The legal system is designed to hear those claims, but the bar for overturning a guilty plea entered in open court, confirmed under oath, is deliberately high. Courts have long recognized that post-conviction proceedings require careful scrutiny to prevent abuse of the process while protecting defendants' rights.

Four families still waiting for finality, and a case that has cost taxpayers millions

Whatever happens in June 2027, the families of Mogen, Goncalves, Kernodle, and Chapin face the prospect of reliving the worst chapter of their lives. The four students were killed in November 2022. Nearly five years later, the man who admitted to their murders is asking a court to let him take it back.

The Idaho murders case has already cost taxpayers more than $8 million. A new trial, if Kohberger's petition ultimately succeeds, would add substantially to that figure, with no guarantee of a different outcome. The evidence that led to Kohberger's arrest and prosecution, including vehicle tracking data and other forensic material, remains part of the record.

Kohberger's claims about hidden hair evidence and a coerced confession will now face adversarial testing. Prosecutors will have the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and challenge the petition's factual basis. The evidentiary hearing on June 17, 2027, is the forum where those claims will either hold up or fall apart.

A man who stood in court and said he did it now says he didn't. The system owes him a hearing. It owes the victims' families something more, an answer that sticks.