A Maui anesthesiologist, a nuclear engineer, a cliffside trail, and the attempted murder charge that shook Hawaii
A woman flies from Maui to Oahu with her husband. It's her 36th birthday. He planned the trip. A romantic getaway, their two young boys back home with the nanny. They check into a hotel in Waikiki. The next morning, he suggests a hike. A trail near the famous Nu'uanu Pali Lookout, where the Ko'olau cliffs drop over a thousand feet into the valley below.
The Nu'uanu Pali Lookout is one of the most photographed spots in Hawaii. Tourists line up for the panoramic views of the Windward Coast, the sheer cliffs, the valley where, in 1795, 400 Hawaiian warriors were driven over the edge to their deaths during the Battle of Nu'uanu. It's beautiful. It's historic. And just off the main path, there's a trail the state closed because it's too dangerous for public use.
That's where they went.
She doesn't want to go too far. The trail feels wrong. Narrow paths. Steep drop-offs on both sides. Nothing but a 300-foot fall separating the walkway from the valley floor. But they keep going.
Then he asks her to take a selfie. Near the edge.
She says no.
What happened next, according to prosecutors, turned a birthday trip into a crime scene, a marriage into a criminal case, and a well-regarded anesthesiologist into a defendant facing life in prison.
This is the case of Hawaii v. Gerhardt Konig. He has pleaded not guilty. He is presumed innocent until a jury says otherwise. And today, that jury will hear opening statements in a trial that has drawn international attention. People magazine. CNN. Court TV. ABC's 20/20. Every major news outlet has covered this story. His defense attorney filed 34 pages of Google search results into the court record just to prove how saturated the coverage has become.
That's a lot of noise. Our job is to cut through it.
This is Justice Is A Process. We don't convict anyone before the evidence is heard. We don't acquit anyone before the defense has spoken. We watch. We question. We educate. And when the system is working or when it's not, we make sure you see it.
Dr. Gerhardt Konig, 46, and his wife Arielle Konig, 36, were on Oahu celebrating Arielle's birthday. According to court filings, Gerhardt had planned the weekend getaway. Their two sons, roughly ages two and four, stayed home on Maui with a nanny and family members.
The couple headed to the Pali Puka trail, a route near the historic Nu'uanu Pali Lookout. The lookout itself is a well-known tourist destination, perched over 1,000 feet above the Oahu coastline with panoramic views of the Ko'olau cliffs and the Windward Coast. The trail branching off from it, however, is a different story. The state Department of Land and Natural Resources has deemed the Pali Puka route unsafe and closed it to the public. Hikers regularly ignore the warnings, entering through a small clearing near the lookout despite posted signs reading "Area Closed."
According to Arielle's account in her petition for a temporary restraining order, the trail made her uneasy. Narrow sections with steep drop-offs on both sides. She told Gerhardt she didn't want to go further. She stayed put while he walked ahead for a bit, then came back. She climbed a tree at one point; he took a photo of her. Then, she said, he suggested they take a selfie together near the cliff's edge.
She told him she felt dizzy. She asked if they could move away from the edge. According to the probable cause affidavit, she said she didn't feel comfortable taking a picture that close to the drop-off. She declined and began to walk back.
According to police and court documents, that refusal triggered what happened next.
Prosecutors allege Gerhardt Konig yelled at his wife, telling her to come back, using profanity. He allegedly pushed her into bushes near the trail. When she tried to get away, he allegedly picked up a rock and struck her in the head approximately ten times while grabbing the back of her hair and smashing her face into the ground.
Arielle told police that during the attack, Gerhardt reached into his bag and pulled out a syringe containing an unknown substance, attempting to inject her with it. When she managed to grab the syringe and throw it, she said, he had a second vial in his hand and was searching for another syringe. She told investigators she bit his forearm in self-defense, which seemed to briefly calm him. But then, she alleged, he picked up a rock and began striking her head again.
Two women hiking nearby heard screams for help. One of them, identified in police reports as "Amanda," told investigators she saw Konig on top of Arielle, hitting her in the head with a rock. She saw blood running down Arielle's face and scratches on her back. The two witnesses called 911 and rushed to help, guiding Arielle down the trail to safety while Konig, according to authorities, fled in the opposite direction up toward the Pali Puka rock formation.
Emergency medical services transported Arielle to The Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu. She was admitted in critical condition with multiple large lacerations to her face and head. She survived. She required surgery for her head wounds. She also suffered a broken left thumb from attempting to defend herself.
Gerhardt Konig was gone. What followed was an all-day search involving the Honolulu Police Department, the Department of Land and Natural Resources, and the Honolulu Fire Department. Police circulated a poster with his photo, identifying him as wanted for attempted murder at the Pali Lookout.
Prosecutors would later tell the court what they allege happened during those hours Konig was hiding. According to their filings, Konig FaceTimed his adult son from his first marriage while covered in blood. The prosecution claims he told his son words to the effect of "I just tried to kill your stepmom, but she got away." He allegedly told the son he wanted to jump off a cliff and kill himself, and that he would turn off his phone so police couldn't track him.
He hid in the brush near the trail area from the morning attack until nightfall. At approximately 6:10 p.m., roughly eight hours after the alleged assault, Honolulu police located and arrested Gerhardt Konig near Nu'uanu Pali Drive after a brief foot pursuit.
According to prosecutors, when he was apprehended, Konig made a statement that would become one of the most discussed details of this case. They allege he said: "Wait, she's not dead?"
The defense has not confirmed this account. Gerhardt Konig has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
But there's more. Days after the arrest, while Arielle was preparing to fly back to Honolulu for Gerhardt's grand jury proceedings, she made a discovery at their home on Maui. According to prosecution filings, she found a fanny pack belonging to her husband that contained several syringes and several vials of what appeared to be drugs labeled as anesthesia medication.
Prosecutors would later argue to the court that Konig was "stashing lethal drugs at home." The defense countered that it's perfectly normal for a practicing anesthesiologist to have medical supplies in his possession and noted that none of those materials were found on Oahu, where the alleged attack occurred.
The question of what was in those syringes, both on the trail and at home, has never been conclusively answered in public filings. It remains one of the biggest open questions heading into trial.
Born in South Africa, Gerhardt Konig built an impressive medical career in the United States. He earned a bachelor's degree in bioengineering and biomedical engineering from the University of California, San Diego, then his medical degree from the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. He completed his anesthesiology residency at UPMC from 2013 to 2016, then stayed on as a staff anesthesiologist and eventually an assistant professor of anesthesiology and bioengineering at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. He held that position for nearly seven years.
In 2022, Konig and Arielle sold their six-bedroom, five-bathroom home on Roycroft Avenue in Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania, for $1.3 million and moved to Maui. Konig had landed what neighbors described as his "dream job," becoming a partner at The Anesthesia Medical Group, a contracting firm based in Kahului that supplies anesthesiologists to hospitals across Hawaii, including Maui Memorial Medical Center.
By all outward appearances, life in Hawaii seemed to be going well. The family moved into a five-bedroom home in a quiet cul-de-sac in the foothills of the West Maui Mountains. Neighbors described the Konigs as a happy family. Konig hosted "whiskey nights" for friends at the house. His colleagues at Maui Memorial called him "friendly" and "quiet." The family's housekeeper, Christina Ferguson, told reporters the arrest was "a complete shock."
Konig had been previously married. He and his first wife Jessica L. Patella married when they were both around 20 years old and stayed together for about 15 years, raising two sons who are now in their late teens and early twenties. Patella filed for divorce in October 2014 in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, and was granted custody of the children. After the arrest, Patella said in a text message that she was "shocked and saddened by the news." She added: "Our hearts are with Ari."
At the time of his arrest in March 2025, Konig had no prior criminal record.
Following the arrest, Maui Health issued a statement confirming Konig was employed through an independent contractor and that his medical privileges at Maui Memorial Medical Center had been suspended pending investigation. A UPMC representative confirmed he had previously worked there but hadn't been employed by the hospital for more than two years. At the time of his arrest, his Hawaii medical license was still listed as "current, valid and in good standing."
The people who knew the Konigs in both Pittsburgh and Maui have struggled to reconcile the allegations with the man they thought they knew. Ben Brown, a former neighbor in Mt. Lebanon, described the family as friendly and said they were good neighbors. The housekeeper, Ferguson, said she'd seen Gerhardt the week before the arrest and noticed nothing out of the ordinary. "Always saw him loving with the kids and with her," she told reporters. "Seemed very family oriented."
His early defense attorney, Myles Breiner, told reporters: "Why he did this? That's a mystery. He has nothing on his record here or anywhere else he's ever lived in. So it's rather surprising that out of nowhere, he would engage in this kind of behavior."
That's the attorney's observation, not a confession. Konig subsequently retained Thomas Otake and Manta Dircks, who entered a plea of not guilty and have aggressively contested the charges ever since.
Arielle Konig, whose maiden name was Arielle Worthington, is a nuclear engineer. She studied nuclear engineering at Penn State University, graduating in 2011, then earned her MBA from the University of Pittsburgh's Katz Graduate School of Business in 2021. For more than 11 years, she worked at Westinghouse Electric Company in Pennsylvania, most recently in fuel engineering. In September 2022, she started a position as a project manager at TerraPower, the nuclear reactor design and development company founded by Bill Gates.
That detail has become part of the public fascination with this case. An anesthesiologist married to a nuclear scientist. A doctor and a rocket scientist, as some outlets have described them. The kind of couple that looked perfect on paper.
Arielle and Gerhardt married on September 4, 2018, in Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania. They share two young sons, Olin and Viggo. After the attack, Arielle's mother traveled to Hawaii to be with her during her recovery. Her attorney, Brandon Segal, issued a statement asking for privacy while she focused on healing. A friend set up a verified GoFundMe to support Arielle and the children.
In May 2025, Arielle filed for divorce. She is seeking full custody of their two sons.
Court filings from both sides paint a picture of a relationship in crisis in the months before the alleged attack.
According to Arielle's restraining order petition, filed days after the incident, Gerhardt accused her in December 2024 of having an affair. She wrote that this accusation led to "extreme jealousy on his part" and that he attempted to "control and monitor all of my communications." The couple entered therapy and counseling.
Arielle also alleged in the petition that Gerhardt had "sexually abused and assaulted" her over the preceding months. These allegations formed part of her TRO request, which a judge granted on March 28, 2025, barring Konig from contacting Arielle or their two young sons.
The defense has pushed back. In court filings, Gerhardt Konig accused Arielle of "falsely portraying herself as a victim of sexual coercion." He also alleged that she transferred more than $123,000 from their joint bank account three days after his arrest.
The restraining order was later dropped by Arielle voluntarily. Her attorney explained it had become unnecessary because Gerhardt was being held without bail. She indicated she might refile if his custody status changed.
Both sides tried to keep the divorce proceedings private. A Maui judge denied that request, ruling the case would remain open to the public. Cameras will also be allowed in the criminal trial.
Look, this is a marriage in which both sides are making serious claims against the other. None of those claims have been adjudicated. What matters for this trial is what the prosecution can prove happened on that trail on March 24th. Everything else is context, not evidence, unless a judge rules it admissible.
Gerhardt Konig is charged with one count of second-degree attempted murder under Hawaii law.
In Hawaii, second-degree murder is defined as intentionally or knowingly causing the death of another person. Attempted murder requires the prosecution to prove that the defendant took a "substantial step" toward intentionally killing the victim. The defendant doesn't have to succeed. But the state has to prove he tried, and that the intent was to kill, not merely to injure.
That distinction matters here. It's the central battlefield of this case.
The prosecution alleges three separate methods of attempted killing: pushing Arielle toward a cliff edge with a 300-foot drop, striking her head with a rock approximately ten times, and attempting to inject her with syringes containing unknown substances. Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Joel Garner has described this as a defendant who "tried three different ways to kill his wife."
The potential consequences are severe. Prosecutors have stated in court filings that Konig "faces a realistic prospect of life imprisonment" if convicted. That's the maximum sentence for attempted murder in the second degree in Hawaii.
Konig has pleaded not guilty. His defense attorney, Thomas Otake, has characterized the case as one that will come down to "he said, she said."
This case has been fought aggressively on both sides long before opening statements. The pretrial litigation tells you a lot about what each side thinks this case is really about.
Konig made his initial court appearance on March 27, 2025, with bail set at $5 million. The very next day, an Oahu grand jury indicted him on one count of second-degree attempted murder and issued a bench warrant for him to be held without bail. That grand jury indictment superseded the district court's bail determination.
Prosecuting Attorney Steve Alm issued a statement calling the indictment a reflection of "the serious nature of crime that is alleged in this case."
In May 2025, Konig's defense team filed a motion requesting bail at a "reasonable amount." Otake suggested somewhere between $100,000 and $200,000, arguing that Konig had no prior criminal record, his home and children were in Hawaii, and he intended to go to trial. He also noted that with the divorce pending, Konig didn't have access to marital assets.
Judge Paul Wong denied bail. His reasoning: evidence that Konig hid from police after the alleged attack, the fact that he presents a serious flight risk, and that he poses a danger to the victim. Prosecutors had argued that Konig was born in South Africa, attempted to flee after the attack, told his son he would turn off his phone to avoid police, and was stashing lethal medications at home.
Konig has been held without bail at the Oahu Community Correctional Center ever since. Nearly a full year in custody before trial.
In January 2026, Otake filed two motions to dismiss the indictment.
The first argued that the grand jury process was defective because prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence. Specifically, Otake pointed to two police physician's report forms completed by doctors who examined Arielle at the hospital. According to the defense, both doctors concluded that her injuries "did not create a substantial risk of death" and did not rise to the level of "serious bodily injury" under Hawaii law.
Think about that for a second. The charge is attempted murder. The prosecution has to prove intent to kill. And the defense is arguing that the state hid medical evidence from the grand jury showing the injuries weren't even life-threatening. If true, does that tell us something about intent?
Otake also challenged what he called "triple hearsay" regarding statements Konig allegedly made to his adult son. A detective relayed to the grand jury what Konig's son reportedly said Konig told him. That's three layers of telephone game before it reaches the grand jury. The defense argues this left jurors with the misleading impression that Konig confessed to attempted murder.
The second motion argued the indictment provided inadequate notice about which "substantial step" the prosecution would rely on at trial. When prosecutors presented three different theories of how Konig allegedly tried to kill Arielle, the defense said they needed to know which one the state would actually pursue.
Prosecutors countered on all points. Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Joel Garner argued that the grand jury is not the place for all evidence to be presented. That's what trial is for. He cited case law supporting the principle that prosecutors are not required to present exculpatory evidence at the grand jury stage. On the hearsay issue, he noted that the son was out of state and his testimony was properly relayed through the detective.
On February 19, 2026, Judge Wong denied both motions. He ruled the grand jury was not misled or deceived. The case moved to trial.
One of the most contentious pretrial battles involved the prosecution's attempt to introduce evidence of Konig's "other crimes, wrongs, or acts" through an interview with his first ex-wife, Jessica Patella. The interview, conducted by prosecutors and an investigator on January 22, 2026, contained allegations of misconduct from roughly 2009 to 2014.
Otake was furious. He filed an emergency motion to seal the filing, calling the claims "untrue, defamatory, salacious and extremely inflammatory." He accused the prosecution of deliberately trying to taint the jury pool one month before trial. He told the court he'd reached out to prosecutors before they filed the evidence, asking them not to do it. Their response, according to Otake: "We will continue to file whatever we feel is necessary to be filed."
On February 5, 2026, Judge Wong largely sided with the prosecution. He rejected the emergency motion to permanently seal the evidence. He did agree to temporarily seal three specific paragraphs containing what the court described as the most salacious claims, giving the defense time to argue why they should remain hidden through jury selection.
Here's where it gets interesting from a constitutional perspective. Otake attached 34 pages of Google search results to his filing to demonstrate the level of media saturation. People magazine. CNN. Court TV. ABC's 20/20. Every major outlet had covered this case. He argued that allowing inflammatory, unproven allegations from an ex-wife to enter the public record weeks before trial would make a fair jury selection nearly impossible.
Judge Wong's response was measured. He acknowledged the publicity but cited the principle that "the prominence of a case and publicity itself does not necessarily produce prejudice, and jury impartiality does not require ignorance."
That's a real tension. And it's one worth watching throughout this trial.
Jury selection began on March 11, 2026. Attorneys questioned 300 prospective jurors. Given the media coverage, finding 12 people who haven't already formed opinions about the "Trouble in Paradise" doctor will be the first test of whether this trial can be fair.
Thomas Otake is one of Honolulu's most experienced criminal defense attorneys. He's handled many of the city's highest-profile cases over the past 15 years. He's said publicly that this level of media attention exceeds anything he's ever seen.
From the pretrial filings, we can piece together the defense strategy.
The core argument: the state can't prove intent to kill.
Otake has emphasized that two doctors who examined Arielle at the hospital concluded her injuries did not create a substantial risk of death. He has described the rock used in the alleged attack as "very small." He has argued there was no concussion diagnosis. If a trained physician reviewed the injuries and concluded they weren't life-threatening, can the state prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended to kill?
On the syringes, the defense has pointed out a critical fact: no syringes were recovered at the scene. Arielle told police about them. The prosecution references them. But physically, they weren't found. The defense challenged this at the grand jury stage, arguing jurors should have been told.
The fanny pack found at the couple's Maui home days after the arrest, which contained syringes and vials labeled as anesthesia medication, is a different matter. Otake has argued that it's not unusual for a practicing anesthesiologist to have medical supplies at home, and that none of those materials were found on Oahu where the alleged attack occurred.
On the alleged statement to his son, the defense has challenged it as unreliable hearsay passed through multiple people. And on the "Wait, she's not dead?" statement allegedly made at arrest, the defense has not confirmed that account.
Otake told the court directly: "Dr. Konig wants this trial to be public. He wants to clear his name."
There's a dimension to this case that you don't see in most attempted murder trials. Gerhardt Konig is a board-certified anesthesiologist. That's not just a credential. It's a skill set that gives him specialized knowledge about medications, dosages, and substances that can render a person unconscious or worse.
The prosecution has leaned into this. Prosecutors told the court that Konig was "stashing lethal drugs at home." They pointed to the fanny pack Arielle found after the arrest. They described a defendant who had access to potentially fatal medications through his work and chose to bring syringes containing unknown substances on a hike to a remote cliffside.
The defense pushes back hard on this framing. A doctor having medical supplies at home isn't evidence of criminal intent. And the substances in the syringes allegedly used on the trail have never been tested because the syringes were never recovered.
This is going to be a significant area of the trial. If the prosecution can establish what was in those syringes and where Konig obtained it, they build a case for premeditation that goes beyond a moment of rage on a trail. If they can't, the syringe allegations become an unproven claim from the victim without physical evidence to back it up.
For the jury, the fact that the defendant is an anesthesiologist cuts both ways. The prosecution will want jurors to think about what a doctor with that training could do with a syringe. The defense will want jurors to see a physician whose profession has been weaponized against him in the court of public opinion.
My dad spent 23 years as a criminal defense attorney in West Virginia. He was twice prosecuted by the system for standing on principle. His entire career was built on one idea: the Constitution only works if we force it to work. If we watch. If we demand it.
This case is dripping with constitutional issues.
Gerhardt Konig has been the subject of front-page coverage in People magazine. CNN. NBC. ABC. Court TV. Fox. 20/20 has expressed interest. His defense attorney filed 34 pages of Google results to demonstrate media saturation. The case has gone international.
And yet, this man has not been convicted of anything. He's been in jail for nearly a year without bail. His medical career is over regardless of the verdict. His name returns thousands of results framing him as a would-be killer.
I'm not making a judgment about whether he's guilty or innocent. That's for the jury. What I am saying is this: the Sixth Amendment guarantees a right to an impartial jury. How do you find 12 impartial people after this level of coverage? The 300-person jury pool tells you the court knows it's a problem.
My father was a criminal defense attorney for 23 years. He would have looked at this case and said the same thing he said about every case: the Constitution doesn't protect the people we like. It protects everyone, or it protects no one. Every defendant, whether they're accused of shoplifting or attempted murder, walks into that courtroom presumed innocent. That's not a technicality. That's the entire foundation.
If the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the system works. If the media convicted him before the jury heard a word, the system failed. Both of those things can be true at the same time. Our job is to watch and find out which one it is.
The defense raised legitimate questions about the grand jury process. Were jurors told about the medical evidence suggesting the injuries weren't life-threatening? Were they given accurate information about the alleged confession, or were they hearing a detective's interpretation of what someone said someone else said?
Grand juries are supposed to be a check on prosecutorial power. They exist to prevent the government from charging people without sufficient evidence. When defense attorneys argue that exculpatory evidence was withheld from that process, it goes straight to the heart of why grand juries exist.
The judge ruled the grand jury wasn't misled. Fair enough. But the questions the defense raised deserve attention at trial, where the full picture gets tested under cross-examination.
The fight over the ex-wife's allegations is a classic tension between two competing interests. The prosecution wants context. They want the jury to see a pattern. The defense wants a trial about March 24, 2025, not allegations from a decade-old divorce that were never proven in court.
Hawaii's rules of evidence, like federal rules, generally prohibit character evidence to prove conduct. But there are exceptions for proving motive, intent, plan, and absence of mistake. Whether the ex-wife's allegations make it in front of the jury could significantly shift how this trial plays out.
We'll be watching that ruling closely.
Jury selection began March 11, 2026, with 300 prospective jurors called. Opening statements begin today, March 19, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. Hawaii time, before Judge Paul Wong in Oahu's First Circuit Court.
Court TV is covering the trial under the banner "Trouble in Paradise Trial."
The prosecution team is led by Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Joel Garner. The defense is led by Thomas Otake, with co-counsel Manta Dircks.
Arielle Konig's attorney has told reporters she intends to testify. That will be one of the most significant moments of this trial. The jury will hear directly from the woman at the center of this case, and the defense will have the opportunity to cross-examine her account of what happened on that trail.
Here's what the prosecution needs to prove: that Gerhardt Konig took a substantial step toward intentionally killing his wife. Not that he hurt her. Not that he was angry. Not that the marriage was in crisis. That he tried to end her life.
Here's what the defense will attack: the medical evidence on injury severity, the missing syringes, the reliability of the alleged confession relayed through hearsay, and any inconsistencies in the state's case.
Beyond those core battles, watch for these dynamics as the trial unfolds:
The witnesses who intervened. The two women who heard screaming and called 911 will likely testify. Their account of what they saw, what they heard, and what condition Arielle was in when they reached her will be critical for establishing the severity of the attack independent of anything Arielle says.
The medical testimony. Doctors who treated Arielle at Queen's Medical Center will testify about her injuries. Were they consistent with being struck ten times in the head with a rock? Were they life-threatening? The gap between the prosecution's framing (attempted murder) and the defense's framing (injuries that didn't create substantial risk of death) will be fought over through medical experts.
Arielle's cross-examination. If Arielle testifies, and her attorney says she will, Otake gets to question her. The defense has signaled this is a "he said, she said" case. That cross-examination will be the most watched moment of the trial. What did she see in those syringes? How many times was she struck? What exactly did she tell police that day versus what she wrote in her TRO petition? Any inconsistencies will be ammunition for the defense.
The son's testimony. Konig's adult son from his first marriage is the person the prosecution says received the FaceTime call in which Konig allegedly confessed. The defense has challenged the hearsay chain. Will the son testify directly? If he does, his account becomes firsthand testimony, not hearsay. If he doesn't, the defense will hammer the unreliability of the prosecution's version.
This trial could last two to three weeks. We'll be here for all of it.
Justice Is A Process is providing comprehensive daily coverage of Hawaii v. Gerhardt Konig. Here's how we're structured:
Live broadcasts every trial day, covering testimony as it happens with real-time legal analysis. No Breaks Edition within 24 hours of each session, giving you the full day condensed without interruption. Trial Analysis Podcast episodes breaking down the testimony, the strategy, and what it all means for the case. Key Moments and testimony clips for the critical exchanges you need to see.
Every piece of coverage is designed to make you smarter about how the system works. We explain why attorneys object. Why judges sustain or overrule. What each piece of testimony means for the prosecution's case or the defense's strategy. This isn't just trial watching. This is legal education happening in real time.
This case has everything: a cliffside crime scene in one of the most beautiful places on earth, a doctor with specialized medical knowledge that cuts both ways, dueling narratives about a marriage in freefall, pretrial legal battles over sealed evidence and grand jury transparency, and a defendant who says he wants to clear his name.
But strip away the headlines and the magazine covers, and this is a case about one question. Did Gerhardt Konig try to kill his wife? The state says yes. He says not guilty. And 12 jurors in Honolulu are about to decide.
We'll be watching to make sure the system does what it's supposed to do. We'll be asking the questions nobody else is asking. And we'll be holding everyone in that courtroom, prosecution and defense, to the standard the Constitution demands.
That's what my dad built. That's what this channel continues.
This is Justice Is A Process. Stay with us.
Subscribe to Justice Is A Process on YouTube for live trial coverage, No Breaks editions, and breaking news as it happens.
🔴 Subscribe on YouTube90,000+ subscribers watching the system with us
Discussion