Honolulu, Hawaii — A Hawaii doctor convicted of attempting to kill his wife is asking the court to throw out the verdict and order a new trial, arguing that possible juror misconduct and errors during deliberations may have affected the outcome.
Gerhardt Konig was convicted on April 8 of attempted manslaughter based on extreme mental or emotional disturbance, more than a year after his wife, Arielle Konig, accused him of trying to kill her during a hiking trip in Hawaii.
Four months after the conviction, Konig’s defense attorneys returned to court seeking another chance to present the case.
Defense Raises Questions About Jury Verdict
During a hearing on Friday, Aug. 14, Konig’s attorneys argued that comments reportedly made by two jurors to the media after the trial could indicate that the jury did not reach a unanimous agreement about whether Konig intended to kill his wife.
The defense also pointed to a social media video in which an anonymous commenter allegedly claimed they had been communicating with a juror while the jury was deliberating.
According to Hawaii News Now, Konig’s attorneys argued that such communication would violate court rules and could potentially have influenced the jury.
Defense attorney Thomas Otake acknowledged that jurors were human and could make mistakes.
“I’m not faulting the jurors. They’re human. They’re trying their best. But mistakes happen, misunderstandings happen,” Otake said, according to the outlet.
He argued that allowing the conviction to remain in place if it was reached improperly would itself be a serious failure.
Judge Plans to Question Jurors
First Circuit Court Judge Paul Wong did not immediately rule on the request.
Instead, the judge said he plans to bring jurors back to court to determine whether there is any truth to the allegations and whether outside influence affected their deliberations.
“The court must ascertain the extent of the influence, so the burden is on me,” Wong said, according to Hawaii News Now.
The judge acknowledged that questioning jurors after a verdict is not something he wanted to do, but said he needed to determine whether they had been “tainted by outside influence.”
The inquiry could become critical to deciding whether Konig receives a new trial.
Wife Describes Alleged Attack on Hiking Trail
Konig’s original trial began on March 19 and included testimony from several witnesses, including Arielle, her stepson Emile Konig, a responding police officer and a hiker who witnessed the alleged attack.
Arielle, a 37-year-old nuclear engineer, testified on March 24 that her husband allegedly tried to pull her toward the edge of a steep cliff during their hiking trip.
She further alleged that he attempted to inject her with an unknown substance before eventually striking her head with a rock. According to her testimony, Konig then fled the area while two hikers who heard her screams came to her aid and called 911.
Son Testifies Against His Father
Konig’s son, Emile Konig, also testified during the trial. On March 31, Emile told jurors that his father called him shortly after the alleged attack.
According to Emile’s testimony, Gerhardt said he had “tried to kill” Arielle and indicated that he intended to jump from a cliff himself.
Emile also alleged that his father told him Arielle had “gotten away” after the attack. Those statements became part of the prosecution’s case as jurors considered what happened during the confrontation.
Konig Remains in Prison as Court Reviews Claims
Konig is currently in prison without bail. The latest legal development does not overturn his conviction. The judge must first determine whether the allegations surrounding the jury have enough substance to justify further action.
Judge Wong’s planned examination of the jurors could provide more clarity about what happened during deliberations and whether any outside communication influenced the verdict.
The next hearing is scheduled for Sept. 11, when the court is expected to continue addressing the defense’s request for a new trial.
For now, Konig’s conviction remains in place, but the defense is hoping the court’s investigation into the jury will ultimately give him another opportunity to contest the charges.
Do you think the judge should order a new trial if juror misconduct is confirmed? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
