Legal Expert Josh Kolsrud Breaks Down the Preston Lord Murder Case

The highly publicized murder case surrounding the tragic death of Preston Lord, a Queen Creek teen killed at a Halloween party in 2023, is making headlines once again as the trial date for six teenage defendants is pushed back. With the complexities mounting and emotions running high for the victim’s family, 12 News turned to criminal defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Josh Kolsrud for his legal insights on why these delays happen and what the defense strategy might look like as the case moves forward.

Why Was the Trial Delayed?

The present delay, as explained by both County Attorney Rachel Mitchell and Attorney Kolsrud, underscores the immense complexity of the case. The evidence amassed comprises a staggering amount of material—over 600 videos and countless additional pieces of evidence. Defense counsel for the six defendants requested more time to properly review the material and prepare, a request that was granted by the judge, despite the understandable frustration of Preston Lord’s family.

“This is a huge police report... It’s been going on a long time for them,” Mitchell stated, emphasizing how the sheer amount of evidence warrants methodical legal proceedings, even as everyone wants justice as swiftly as possible.

The Strategy Behind a Joint Trial

One of the pivotal aspects of the case is the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office’s decision to try all six defendants together, rather than in separate trials. Kolsrud provides crucial insight into the prosecution’s reasoning and its consequences:

• Resource Efficiency: “It saves time and resources,” says Kolsrud. A joint trial is a more streamlined process than holding multiple, nearly identical proceedings.
• Accomplice Liability: Prosecutors are charging each defendant under the theory of joint or accomplice liability. Regardless of the level of direct involvement—whether one was the primary aggressor or another simply assisted in the confrontation—each defendant could face the same severe charge of first-degree murder.

“Even if one of the other defendants didn’t really do too much… he’s equally culpable, and can still get the same sentence for first-degree murder.”

Is Joint Liability Fair?

Josh isn’t shy about highlighting the potential downside for the accused:

“If you’re a prosecutor, you love this strategy... you can bring in more evidence and show the jury this was almost like a conspiracy. The cards are going to be so stacked against these defendants if the judge does not sever the case.”

Kolsrud underscores that jurors—even when given strict instructions—often have trouble compartmentalizing evidence that should only apply to some defendants but not others. This “one-size-fits-all” approach can unfairly prejudice defendants who may have played only minor roles.

Legal Protections for the Defense

Despite the challenges of a joint trial, Kolsrud points out an important legal precedent that offers some protection: the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bruton v. United States. Under Bruton, if a defendant’s out-of-court statement implicates another co-defendant, and the defendant chooses not to testify, the statement cannot be used against the co-defendant because it would violate the constitutional right to cross-examine one’s accuser.

“There are positive things for the defense attorneys here that limit the amount of evidence for statements that their clients may have given,” Kolsrud notes.

The Road Ahead

With defense teams actively seeking to separate (sever) their clients’ cases, all eyes are on the November hearing, which will determine whether the defendants will be tried together or individually.

Key Takeaways from Attorney Josh Kolsrud

• Joint trials favor the prosecution but raise serious fairness concerns for defendants, especially in high-profile multi-defendant cases.
• Prosecutors can pursue first-degree murder charges against all participants under accomplice liability—even those only minimally involved.
• Supreme Court precedent like Bruton v. United States provides vital protections for defendants against certain types of prejudicial evidence.
• Meticulous review and adequate preparation are critical to ensure justice is served—regardless of the public pressure for swift outcomes.

As the Preston Lord case continues to unfold, Josh Kolsrud’s deep legal knowledge, practical experience, and thoughtful analysis remain invaluable for those following the proceedings and for defense clients facing complex criminal charges.