Utah News

EastIdahoNews.com Staff

Updated Sun, May 24, 2026 at 2:53 PM UTC

SARATOGA SPRINGS, Utah (KSL) — Authorities issued an Amber Alert early Sunday for two young children believed to have been abducted by a family member in Saratoga Springs, and are asking the public for help locating them and the suspect.

The suspect was identified as Dane Stephen Richman, 6-foot-2 and about 195 pounds, with brown hair and green eyes, according to the alert. Authorities said his clothing description was unknown.

“There is concern for the safety and well-being of the children as the suspect has been seriously depressed, selling possessions, facing financial stress, and abandoned his home,” the Amber Alert states.

Advertisement

Police identified the missing children as Wesley Dane Richman, an infant described as 2-foot-2 and about 23 pounds with blonde or strawberry-colored hair and blue eyes, and Will Thomas Richman, 1, who is described as 2-foot-6 and about 31 pounds with blonde or strawberry-colored hair and blue eyes.

Authorities said the abduction occurred in Saratoga Springs. Investigators said the suspect may be driving a black 2025 Toyota Camry with Utah license plate A561HL. The Amber Alert said the vehicle might have a temporary tag, and the license plate may not be visible.

Anyone with information is urged to call police at 801-798-5600 or dial 911 immediately.

The post Amber Alert issued for 2 young boys abducted in Utah; lives ‘in danger’ appeared first on East Idaho News.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University was a shocking reminder that political violence can touch us anywhere in today’s world. When dangerous people can track down their targets with ease, national tensions can play out in our own backyards.

That’s why it’s worth celebrating the passage of a new data privacy law that could make Utah a leader in the fight against political violence. HB450, signed by Gov. Spencer Cox in March, includes a provision to protect family homes from being exposed to attacks through campaign finance reports.

Previously, an individual who gave as little as $51 to a candidate in Utah had their street name and number published in state records for all to see. Exposing exact home addresses is not necessary to provide transparency to voters, and it puts Utahns and their families at risk every time they support a campaign.

It was once possible to dismiss these privacy invasions as trivial. Few people used — let alone abused — political contribution records when they were stored on paper. But the internet, smartphones, GPS and other technological advances changed the game.

Every year, it gets easier to access, analyze and weaponize the personal information these reports contain. In an era of rising political violence, states would be wise to clean up their laws now, before donors become targets. Utah did exactly that.

HB450 updates the state’s donor records for the digital age by removing the exact home addresses of individual donors. The money will still be transparent and traceable. The donations and the donor’s identity will still be public. But extremists will no longer be handed road maps for terror.

The law, which addressed a wide range of data privacy topics, passed 66-1 in the House and 28-0 in the Senate. That overwhelming bipartisan support is a reminder that privacy is not a partisan issue.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC), the bipartisan agency tasked with enforcing the federal campaign finance laws, agrees. The FEC has unanimously recommended that Congress pass similar reforms to redact home addresses from federal reports.

As FEC Commissioner Dara Lindenbaum has noted, the risk of publishing home addresses goes beyond political violence. Many vulnerable people want to keep their address off the internet, such as victims of domestic violence or stalking, or people whose jobs put them in contact with dangerous individuals.

Efforts to update and reform these laws have been underway for years. But the recent spike in political violence — including the killing of Kirk and the assassination of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband at their home — has spurred more states to act.

Already this year,West Virginia and Minnesota have passed similar reforms to protect their citizens at home. Another donor address redaction bill is currently being considered in Arizona. Three other states — California, Texas, and Wyoming — already do not require home addresses to be exposed in political contribution records.

The lesson is clear. States don’t have to choose between transparent campaigns and donor safety. We can have both at the same time.

Redactions of sensitive personal information do not detract from campaign disclosure laws. They improve them.

Violent individuals should never be able to silence the voice of the American people. Utah leaders were wise to be proactive in safeguarding civic engagement. Hopefully the rest of the country soon follows suit.

In February 2026 , in a packed courtroom in Summit County, Utah, chief prosecutor Brad Bloodworth laid out the state’s case against Kouri Richins, for the murder of Eric Richins,  her husband and father of their three sons.

The case against Kouri Richins

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): The evidence will prove that Kouri Richins murdered Eric for his money and to get a fresh start at life.

It had been nearly four years since Eric died on March 4, 2022, of a lethal dose of fentanyl — served to him by Kouri in a cocktail, say prosecutors. She had spent almost three years in jail awaiting trial.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): More than anything, she wanted his money to perpetuate her facade of privilege, affluence and success.

Eric Richins owned a lucrative contracting business, and Kouri Richins worked as a real estate agent, buying and flipping houses. She was facing not just murder charges, but also insurance fraud and forgery counts.

Greg Hall: She was absolutely convinced … that she would be found not guilty.

Greg Hall is a friend and former colleague of Kouri’s.

Natalie Morales: What made her so  convinced of that … outcome?

Greg Hall: ‘Cause she knows that she didn’t do it.

Initially, authorities thought Eric may have died from an accidental drug overdose. But as investigators dug deeper, they concluded that Kouri poisoned Eric for financial gain.

Greg Skordas: “Watch out for Kouri, watch out if something happens to me.”

According to Greg Skordas, a spokesperson for Eric Richins’ family, Eric had raised concerns about Kouri to his family.

Natalie Morales: The night Eric died … were they immediately suspecting that Kouri took part in his death?

Greg Skordas: They suspected Kouri would take part in his death before it happened. And so when it did happen, it was everyone’s worst, you know, nightmare come true.

KOURI RICHINS TO 911 (crying): My husband is not breathing. He’s cold.

As the state built its case against Kouri Richins, her 911 call — saying she found Eric Richins unresponsive in bed — was an integral piece of evidence.

911 OPERATOR: If you need you to put me on speaker, put me on speaker – I’m going to guide you through CPR, OK?

The prosecution used the recording throughout the trial to call into question whether Kouri was even trying to resuscitate Eric.

911 OPERATOR: Start counting out loud so I can count with you, OK?

The operator repeatedly asks the phone to be put on speaker, so Kouri can listen while performing CPR.

911 OPERATOR: One, two, three, four — am I on speaker?

KOURI RICHINS: Yes.

But a prosecution digital forensic analyst testified that phone receiver sensor activity showed Kouri was actually holding the phone to her ear during the call.

CHRIS KOTRODIMOS (in court): There is a proximity sensor inside the device that activates the receiver.

Laura | Juror: The digital download expert … could actually see that Kouri did not put the phone on speaker phone … she was still holding it up to her ear. That means she wasn’t doing compressions or if she was, she was doing it with one hand.

The 911 call was impactful for jurors Laura and Eric, who requested we not use their last names.

Eric | Juror: Listening to the call, it didn’t seem like there was much effort in the compressions themselves.

The impression these jurors had of her resuscitation attempts didn’t match Kouri Richins’ description of events, which she texted to her friend, Chelsea Barney. Prosecutor Bloodworth read the messages  to the jury.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): “His lifeless body on my bedroom floor. … I pumped so damn hard, so hard screaming at him to come back to life that I needed him.”

Eric | Juror: Some of her text messages to a friend, she said she was screaming and beating on his chest. And the evidence did not show that.

Some of Kouri’s other actions the day Eric died puzzled the jurors we interviewed, like her behavior on a deputy’s bodycam footage, shown in court.

Laura | Juror: It was strange right after Eric died. Kouri was holding … her face with her hands …

Eric | Juror: It certainly looks like she was trying to hide her face, and her emotions.

DEPUTY (bodycam): — where are your children now?

KOURI RICHINS: One’s asleep in that room. Two are awake with their ear to the door.

And when the jurors compared Kouri’s behavior in the footage to Eric’s sister’s, they found the contrast startling.

Eric | Juror: Eric’s sister Katie Richins came in. She was hysterical … near — hyperventilating. And her first thought is: Where are the kids? Are the kids OK? And through that whole video, Kouri said, my kids are in that room. And one of ’em’s listening. But never did she move to go comfort those kids.

Eric’s sister, Katie, testified about arriving at the house.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): On the morning that Eric died, did Kouri Richins say anything about the house that they were living in?

KATIE RICHINS BENSON: Yes. … she told me she was going to sell it.

According to Katie, just hours after Eric’s death, Kouri was talking real estate: how she planned to sell their home, and how she needed to close on a house she had just purchased, known as the “Midway Mansion.”

KATIE RICHINS BENSON (in court): I had just lost one of the most important people in my whole entire life and she was planning on selling the house that he had just been wheeled out of, closing on a multimillion-dollar mansion. I could not wrap my head around it.

Prosecutors also presented evidence of something accessed on Kouri’s cellphone that morning — GIFs, seemingly celebrating coming into money.

Eric | Juror: I thought the GIFs were really odd. If she was the one that pulled them up, which it certainly seems like that is the case, that’s — just more evidence of her — state of mind at the time.

It was not clear to the jurors whether the GIFs were celebrating Eric’s death or celebrating the Midway mansion purchase. Either way, they found the timing curious.

Laura | Juror: It’s still inappropriate the day after her husband passed away that she’s accessing these. … So, it was strange.

Strange behavior aside, the state’s case hinged on proving Kouri intentionally poisoned Eric; that he did not die of an accidental overdose. The prosecution contends it was Kouri who administered the fentanyl — either in a cocktail, called a Moscow mule, or in a lemon drop shot, that she prepared for Eric.

Investigators found a note in a kitchen cabinet, which the prosecution says chronicles how Kouri killed Eric.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): Notice that here she writes “drink in bed.”

And the prosecutor told the jury about something else authorities found unusual. In the incident report, describing what happened that night, Kouri immediately writes about having a drink around 9:15 p.m. to celebrate work.

Laura: Her story that night that she wrote started with Eric drinking a drink that she made. … why would her story start then? … Why wouldn’t it start when she walked in the door and found that he wasn’t moving? That was just one of these really subtle things that I thought was really important.

Also important for jurors was knowing how Kouri obtained the fentanyl. For that, prosecutors turned to a witness who became a controversial figure in the case: Kouri’s housekeeper.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): Did you ask Kouri Richins about Eric’s death?

CARMEN LAUBER: Yes, I did.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: What did you ask her?

CARMEN LAUBER: I said, please tell me these pills were not for him. 

Jurors find housekeeper’s testimony credible

Carmen Lauber was Kouri and Eric’s housekeeper and she cleaned homes for Kouri’s real estate flipping business. Prosecutors say Carmen also did something else — she supplied Kouri with the drugs used to kill Eric.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): Did Kouri Richins ever ask you to purchase for her illicit drugs?

CARMEN LAUBER: Yes.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: How many times?

CARMEN LAUBER: Four.

Skye Lazaro: In a lot of ways … she is the key witness.

Skye Lazaro had been Kouri Richins attorney, before resigning from the case due to a conflict of interest.

Skye Lazaro: Carmen really was the only person who could tie Kouri to obtaining fentanyl.

Carmen testified that in the months preceding Eric’s death, Kouri asked her to get pain medication for a client, which Carmen did. Then, about two weeks before Eric died, Kouri made another request, for something stronger. Carmen says she reached out to a drug dealer friend and told Kouri she could get her fentanyl.

CARMEN LAUBER (in court): I had texted Kouri back and told her that I had a — a friend that could get them, but they were fentanyl pills.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: How did Kouri Richins respond?

CARMEN LAUBER: She said, OK, go ahead and get ’em.

The state contends Kouri mixed that fentanyl into the Moscow mule or lemon drop shot she served Eric. Carmen, though, has an arrest record from drug charges, and is not an ideal witness.

Greg Skordas: She had a history of drug abuse, and although I think she’s overcome that … Those are who you deal with in criminal cases … They’re not always the shiniest people in the world.

The jurors we spoke with were able to look past Carmen’s history and found her credible.

Eric | Juror: I put a lotta weight on Carmen Lauber’s testimony. I found it — very impactful — very important to the prosecution’s case. And her testimony was corroborated with the digital evidence.

The state’s digital forensic expert testified about hundreds of texts messages between Kouri and Carmen, that matched Carmen’s timeline of when Kouri contacted her for drugs. Because the messages were deleted, investigators could only retrieve the dates and times, but not the messages’ content.

CHRIS KOTRODIMOS (in court): Between the two of them, about 800 text messages.

The prosecution argued, throughout the trial, that this was not the first time Kouri used drugs to try to kill Eric. Investigators learned that two weeks before his death, on Valentine’s Day, Eric became ill after Kouri served him what they say was a drug-laced breakfast sandwich.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): On Valentine’s Day, it was a sandwich. When she murdered him, it was a drink.

As for a motive, prosecutors say Kouri needed  money. A forensic accountant testified about her money problems.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): What was the amount of Kouri Richins’ liabilities? 

BROOKE KARRINGTON: Right about $8 million. 

She said Kouri was in debt for nearly $8 million from her house flipping business, some of it from the recent purchase of that Midway mansion. And Eric, between his contracting business, property, and life insurance, was worth a lot.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: On the day that Eric died, his estate was worth over $4 million.

There was also evidence that Kouri took out an additional $100,000 life insurance policy on Eric, about a month before he died—and that Eric’s signature  was forged — a forgery, prosecutors say, committed by Kouri.

Juror Eric | Juror: She used her business address for this policy and made herself the beneficiary. … And frankly, even as a lay person, looking at the signatures, Eric did not sign that document.

And there may have been another motive for murder. According to the state, Kouri wanted a new life with Josh Grossman, a handyman she met  through her house flipping business. They had an affair for about two years.

Greg Skordas: I don’t know how much the family knew about the fact that she had a — a paramour. I don’t even know how much Eric knew about it. … that turned out to be a helpful piece of evidence that was discovered during the investigation.

Josh Grossman testified that after he heard Kouri had been arrested for Eric’s murder, by which time they had broken up, he reached out to Eric’s family.

JOSH GROSSMAN (in court) I was overwhelmed with guilt, sorrow, over my wrongdoings, you know, infidelity and uh …

Juror Laura: With respect to Josh Grossman, he seemed like a believable witness. I think we all felt really sorry for him at times that he was crying.

Josh told investigators about a conversation he had with Kouri, that now, under the lens of murder, took on new meaning. Josh,  who had served with the Army in Iraq, was asked about that conversation.

JOSH GROSSMAN (in court): She asked if — if I had ever killed anybody.

BRAD BLOODWORTH: Did she ask a follow up question?

JOSH GROSSMAN: Yes. … She asked me how it made me feel or something along those lines.

The jury was also shown text messages between Kouri and Josh.

Natalie  Morales (to Skye): I mean, you see those text messages back and forth, very lovey,  “Life is going to be different, I promise.” “If I was divorced right now and asked you to marry me, you would?” “I just want to lay on the couch and cuddle you, watch a murder documentary, and snuggle.” … I mean, you know, I don’t know that that gets any closer to the reality of what actually happened in this case.

Skye Lazaro: Yeah, in hindsight, I don’t think those, uh, probably well thought out. … these coming in the way they did and the timing of ’em — I think certainly did not help Kouri.

Something else that did not help Kouri was the reservation she booked for a romantic getaway with Josh.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): Did you know about a trip planned to the Secrets St. Martin’s Resort? 

JOSH GROSSMAN: Yes.

Kouri sent Josh the reservation she made before Eric died, with the trip planned for April — a month after Eric’s death.

Laura | Juror: The reservation for the trip was damaging to Kouri. … To me that made it look like she had been planning something for a while. And at some point soon, Eric would be out of the picture.

As the investigation proceeded, Kouri said the prosecution was worried about being caught. It showed web searches Kouri made after Eric’s death, including: “luxury prisons for the rich in america,” “how long does life insrance companies takento.pay,” “if someone is poisned what does it go down on the death certificate as.”

Eric | Juror: Kouri’s internet searches … the questions that were being searched led me to believe she had a guilty mind.

Skye Lazaro: These searches … were done after she was handed a search warrant when they searched the home … it kinda takes the sting out of them. I think it’s somewhat understandable.

Natalie Morales: So this is after the fact.

Skye Lazaro: This is after, and well after, in fact.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): She was looking for information based on what she found out after Eric died.

It was one of the points that Kouri’s own defense team made, as it tried to poke holes in the entire prosecution’s case.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court) You know what you’re never going to hear, is how that fentanyl got inside of him. Because there is zero evidence of that.

Kouri Richins’ defense takes aim at prosecution’s witnesses, claims

Just outside of Salt Lake City, home to famed ski resorts including park City, is the nearly 10-acre estate that Kouri Richins was planning on flipping.

Natalie Morales: … that looks ginormous.

 Skye Lazaro: It’s massive.

Skye Lazaro told us Kouri hoped to walk away with nearly $10 million in profit.

Skye Lazaro: I think this … was kind of her dream when she got into this idea of flipping houses was to be able to do properties like this.

And it was that estate, said Kouri Richins’ defense attorney Kathryn Nester in her opening statement, the couple were toasting the night Eric died.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): Eric and Kouri Richins … were celebrating.

KATHRYN NESTER: … They were celebrating because Kouri was about to close on the biggest real estate deal that her company had ever done.

KATHRYN NESTER: They had a lot to celebrate. They also had a wonderful family.

Nester showed jurors a family photo of Eric and Kouri with their three sons — seemingly happy — and spoke about the love they shared for their boys.

KATHRYN NESTER: … And what’s more important is that the boys adored their father. … And Kouri knew that about her sons and about her family.

Nester asked jurors to consider why Kouri would poison Eric, knowing the impact it would have on their three sons.

KATHRYN NESTER: Now after you’ve listened to all the evidence in this case …You’re gonna have to decide if Kouri Richins intentionally and knowingly poisoned … the father of her kids, knowing that she was gonna cause those little boys to feel pain every day for the rest of their life for the loss of their father.

Kouri’s friend Greg Hall says Kouri would never do that.

Greg Hall: She was loving. She was kind. She was giving. … A wonderful mother.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): Eric suffered from pain, a lot.

Nester told jurors Eric Richins lived with chronic pain —

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): … he suffered from knee and back pain related to his work. … He did hard work.

— and used drugs recreationally often taking marijuana gummies.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): … these are all gummies that the police found in Eric’s things.

Nester said Eric also used pain medication.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): You’re also going to hear … that there was an empty pill bottle right next to him.

The label on that pill bottle was for the painkiller hydrocodone and it had expired in 2020. Nester suggested it was Eric who may have come into contact with fentanyl.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): …You’re gonna hear that just a few weeks before Eric died, guess where he was, Mexico. Guess where the fentanyl comes into this country from, Mexico.

One by one, the defense challenged the state’s witnesses, beginning with Eric’s sister Katie Richins Benson, and her account of Kouri’s behavior the night Eric died.

KATHRYN NESTER (in court): And you also said that … she just stood there and did not comfort you in any way?

KATIE RICHINS-BENSON: Not that I recall.

KATHRYN NESTER: OK.

KATHRYN NESTER: … Your Honor, we’d like to play a clip. This is State’s Exhibit 1-4.

KATHRYN NESTER : OK, so that’s Kouri. Freeze it right there.

KATHRYN NESTER: … And that’s her squatting down to comfort you while you’re on the ground and that’s, y’all hugging, right

KATIE RICHINS BENSON: Correct. 

KATHRYN NESTER: So your memory about that was clearly wrong.

KATIE RICHINS BENSON: To be fair, it was four years ago. 

KATHRYN NESTER: OK.

When it came to state’s key witness Carmen Lauber, the defense pointed out that she made a deal with police in order to stay out of prison. Defense attorney Wendy Lewis played a portion of one of Carmen’s interviews with investigators.

INVESTIGATOR #1: They’re looking to pull your drug court deal and ask for seven years on your two firsts …

INVESTIGATOR #1: … The only exception to that and the only thing that they’re willing to kind of help you out with is if you can help us out with this. 

INVESTIGATOR #2: And by — so he means like give us the details that will ensure Kouri gets convicted of murder. 

WENDY LEWIS (in court): So that’s what they said to you. 

CARMEN LAUBER: Yes.

WENDY LEWIS: … you may be getting seven years in prison on your state case. 

CARMEN LAUBER: Correct.

WENDY LEWIS: But if you help them out, that’s not gonna happen.

CARMEN LAUBER: Correct.

Skye Lazaro: … the investigators keep pushin’ on her. “… We need more. That’s not enough.” … And finally in the last interview, they basically just spell it out.

CARMEN LAUBER: I love Eric. … If it was done, intentionally, he did not deserve it.

INVESTIGATOR: … we believe you and that’s why we are here working on what your get out of jail free card looks like …

Skye Lazaro: You know, it’s, “this is your one get out of jail free card. You have to basically say it’s fentanyl.”

WENDY LEWIS (in court): And you are willing to do whatever it takes to save yourself from drug — getting kicked outta drug court and going to prison, correct?

CARMEN LAUBER: I’m going to go forward with the truth. Yes.

Laura | Juror: … I think the defense was really hammering her. … And I don’t think it went over that well.

CARMEN LAUBER (in court): She said, “OK, go ahead and get the fentanyl.”

WENDY LEWIS: That’s your testimony today?

CARMEN LAUBER: When I told her what I had that’s what she said, yes.

Even if Carmen bought fentanyl for Kouri, the defense said there was no proof that Kouri used the drug to poison her husband. Kathryn Nester told the jury the cups Kouri served the drinks in were never tested that night. 

KATHRYN NESTER : … The nanny ended up putting them in the dishwasher the next morning.

Eric | Juror: I think the most powerful point … the defense made is that we don’t know exactly how the fentanyl got into Eric Richins’ stomach.

Skye Lazaro: … when you have to prove murder — uh, you have to prove … that she’s the one that administered — the fentanyl to him.

The defense pushed back on the state’s claim that Kouri had tried to poison Eric weeks earlier with that Valentine’s Day sandwich. Kouri’s friend Aly Staking said the couple downplayed that episode as Eric having an allergic reaction.

ALEMITU STAKING (in court): He took a bite of the sandwich and got an allergic reaction and had to shoot himself with an EpiPen.

WENDY LEWIS: Was everyone laughing?

ALEMITU STAKING: Yes, we were all laughing and we jokingly said, don’t eat what Kouri feeds you.

WENDY LEWIS: OK. And did Eric appear upset about what had happened prior with the sandwich?

ALEMITU STAKING: No. 

And as for the financial motive that Kouri was broke? Skye Lazaro says Kouri Richins’ multimillion-dollar debt was typical in the house flipping business.

Skye Lazaro: That’s what they do for a living, is they invest in homes to flip.

Natalie Morales: So you’re saying it’s part of the business?

Skye Lazaro: Right.

Natalie Morales: That you’d get in — in debt, and then you flip the house, you sell it, and then you make your money back.

Skye Lazaro: Absolutely.

And that $100,000 life insurance policy the state claimed wasn’t signed by Eric? Nester said there is an innocent explanation.

KATHRYN NESTER: I’m telling you right now, wives everywhere sign their husband’s names on a lot of things. You’ve gotta find that she did it without his knowledge. And I don’t know how they’re gonna prove that.

The defense also downplayed Kouri’s affair with Josh Grossman, who testified they never went on that romantic getaway Kouri had booked for them.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): … then Kouri ended the relationship, correct? 

JOSH GROSSMAN: Right.

Eric |Juror: It was a little bit difficult to understand what the situation was … with Josh Grossman, because she did seem to drop him pretty quickly …

Natalie Morales: … do you think that Josh Grossman’s relationship with Kouri had anything to do with Eric’s death —

Greg Hall: No, no.

Greg Hall: … if that were the case, after Eric passed away, that relationship would have continued, not been tapered off. It doesn’t make any logical sense. …

On March 12, 2026, after three weeks and 40 witnesses from the state, the prosecution rested its case.

The jurors say they were expecting to see defense evidence and hear from their witnesses.

Laura | Juror: I’m like, “OK. Now, we can hear the rest of the story.”

But what happened next caught everyone off guard.

“Now we’ve seen just about everything in this trial,” says surprised juror

Laura | Juror: … my mouth just dropped open. … I was just like, “What?” I was so shocked and I was actually really disappointed.

Thirteen days into the trial, Judge Richard Mrazik asked Kouri Richins’ defense team about their first witness.

Eric | Juror: … I was totally prepared for however many days or weeks of vigorous defense.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): … Who is, uh, defense counsel’s first witness?

WENDY LEWIS: Um… can we have just a minute? We have — we have a couple of options …

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: Understood.

But the option defense attorneys Wendy Lewis and Kathryn Nester chose was one these jurors were not expecting.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): Your Honor, actually at this time the defense intends to rest.

Eric | Juror: … I was like, “Seriously?” …Now we’ve seen just about everything in this trial.

Laura | Juror: I was disappointed … because I’m like, you know, I felt like there was more to the story. And they denied us access to that.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): I just want to make sure you’ve consulted with your client about this.

WENDY LEWIS: Absolutely.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: Ms. Richins, may I ask you two direct questions?

KOURI RICHINS: Yes.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: Do you understand that you have the right to testify at trial?

KOURI RICHINS: Yes. I do.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: … are you following your attorney’s advice in waiving your right to testify at trial?

KOURI RICHINS: Yes, I am.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK: I accept your waiver, I find it is knowing and voluntary.

Laura says she at least expected the defense to present testimony about Eric’s alleged drug use and what role, if any, it played in his death.

Laura | Juror: … they were just hinting, ever so slightly, at these things, without backing it up. So I was really hoping for some testimony, if that’s really true or you just trying to confuse, everything.

Greg Skordas, who happens to be an attorney himself, says perhaps the defense saw no need to call witnesses because it felt there was enough reasonable doubt.

Greg Skordas: … if you think you’re winning after the prosecution puts on its case, then there’s no reason to put on a case, because you could only hurt yourself. … And so why—why even risk putting on a witness that could hurt you.

Laura says throughout the trial she would sometimes look over at the defense table.

Laura | Juror: … there was really no vibe coming from her. Like, I couldn’t sense whether she was upset, or angry, or sad. She had a very flat affect.

Natalie Morales: Was that part of it, the likability of Kouri Richins at that point? Do you think they saw a woman who was having an affair, who was in debt.

Skye Lazaro: I think that’s how it certainly could be taken. … There never was a real opportunity … to humanize her, to make her likable, to make her seem like a person who wouldn’t do that.                                                     

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): Mr. Bloodworth, would you like to proceed?

In its closing, the prosecution portrayed Kouri Richins as a ruthless social climber, chasing a life beyond what she had, at her family’s expense.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): … Behind the facade however, Kouri Richins was incompetent. … Her business was imploding. … All the while, Kouri Richins was more interested in spending time with Josh Grossman than Eric. … but she did not have the money to leave Eric or the money to salvage her business.

BRAD BLOODWORTH (in court): She is a risk taker. There was a way forward. Eric had to die.

The defense used its closing argument to lay out its entire case —

WENDY LEWIS (in court): They want you to look at a woman in the worst moment of her life.

–citing several reasons why there was reasonable doubt.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): The investigation in this matter was nothing but sloppy. It was driven by bias.

Wendy Lewis told jurors the investigators developed tunnel vision early on, driven by Eric’s family’s belief that Kouri was guilty.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): Everything about this investigation was led by the Richins family.

Laura | Juror: … it did give me pause whether there was this bias in the entire investigation that started with the Richins family.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): What else do we find on that first day that Eric died?

Lewis pointed to that trip Eric took to Mexico shortly before his death, and that empty pill bottle on his nightstand.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): … The hydrocodone bottle. … What was kept in that bottle? … What might be the best way to bring illegal pills back from Mexico? Put them in a prescription bottle?

WENDY LEWIS (in court): So what’s another explanation? What could have happened? … Maybe he thought it was something else, and he accidentally got fent — fentanyl. Maybe had they tested that bottle, we would know, but they didn’t.

She urged the jurors to stand with Kouri Richins.

WENDY LEWIS (in court): Kouri Richins did not kill Eric Richins. The state did not prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt, and you have the courage. Have the courage to tell them this and find Kouri Richins not guilty.

Natalie Morales: … how was Kouri feeling … did she ever feel like this may not go her way?

Greg Hall: No. Absolutely not, honestly. Not at all. She was upbeat, hopeful, enthused … She was absolutely convinced … that she would be found not guilty.

The Richins children speak out

After sitting through the three-week trial, jurors Eric and Laura had no way of knowing what other jurors were thinking — nor how long reaching a verdict could take.

Laura | Juror: I was thinking this is gonna be a very long week.

But in the end, deliberations would only last about three hours. Laura, one of the two women on the eight-person jury, was selected as foreperson.

Laura | Juror: When we got back there, I think everyone was bursting. I felt like I was bursting at the seams.

For the jurors, Kouri’s money trouble proved to be a motive for Eric’s murder.

Eric | Juror: She was in such a position that she had to take drastic action to dig out of the financial hole that she was in. 

Eric | Juror: I shared that I thought the evidence was devastating against Kouri and that she was guilty. … I think that … opened the door, to other people to share exactly where they stood.

And when the decision was made to vote, the rest of the jury agreed—not just that Kouri murdered Eric — but that she previously attempted to kill him with that poison laced Valentine’s Day sandwich, and, that she committed two counts of insurance fraud, and forgery.

On March 16, 2026, Judge Richard Mrazik read the verdict:

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): “Count one aggravated murder, we the jury unanimously find that the defendant Kouri Richins is guilty of aggravated murder.”

Kouri Richins was stunned as she learned she was found guilty of all five counts related to Eric’s death, says her friend Greg Hall.

Greg Hall: Totally unexpected. She was absolutely crushed and heartbroken.

Kouri Richins declined our request for an interview.

Two months later, on what would have been Eric Richins’ 44th birthday, Kouri Richins – now wearing a prison uniform – was back in court to receive her sentence.

Eric’s family gave heartfelt statements. His sister Amy emphasized the impact his loss has had on his three sons.

AMY RICHINS (in court): This crime didn’t just happen once. It happens every single morning when those boys wake up and realize their father’s still gone.

The boys were 5, 7 and 9 when their world was shattered. Today they are 9, 11 and 13, and through written statements read by each of their counselors, for the first time, the world got to hear from them.

The first statement read aloud was written by the youngest, Weston.

WESTON’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #1:  “When someone talks about Kouri, it makes me feel hateful and ashamed. She took away my dad. It’s made me have a hard time trusting people.”

The middle child, Ashton, called Kouri greedy and said she did not properly care for him and his brothers.

ASHTON’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #2: ” … when we got hurt, you didn’t even care.”

He accused her of harming the family pets.

ASHTON’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #2: You wouldn’t let me put my kitten in the garage for safety at night. And we found it eaten by raccoons the next day. You wouldn’t let us turn on and use the heater lamp for the chickens and bunnies, and they froze to death.

Carter, the oldest, said Kouri was often drunk and would lock him in his room.

CARTER’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #3: “This happened pretty much daily. I feel angry that she locked me in my room. … I miss my dad, but I do not miss how my life used to be. I don’t miss Kouri. I will tell you that.”

All three boys asked the judge to give their mother, whom they only referred to as Kouri, the harshest possible sentence.

CARTER’S STATEMENT | Read by counselor #3 “… what she did is very sick …”

When it was their turn, Kouri’s friends and family pleaded for leniency. Her brother Ronnie.

RONNIE DARDEN (in court): … the injustice that’s occurred here in this courtroom, it’ll be righted in time. … And until then, little sister, just know … that I’m right by your side and I’ll always be right here for you. I love you.

Then Kouri Richins was allowed to speak. She did not testify at trial but now she approached the podium and used her time to address her kids.

KOURI RICHINS (in court): I will use any opportunity I can to get a message to you.

She says she has been cut off from them for the past two years.

KOURI RICHINS (in court): As much as you’ve been influenced into thinking that dad was murdered, that I took your dad from you, that is completely wrong and an absolute lie. … And just because someone may not be perfect, that’s a far reach for them to be capable of murder

Judge Mrazik had two options when considering Kouri Richins’ sentence — either 25 year-to-life with the possibility of parole or life in prison without parole — and he made it known he carefully considered each.

JUDGE RICHARD MRAZIK (in court): The Court’s duty is to make a decision, a weighty, long-lasting decision based on the best information available today. … Accordingly, Miss Richins … the Court hereby sentences you to life without parole. 

For Eric’s family it was the end to a yearslong nightmare. Greg Skordas, the family spokesperson, says the true heartbreak is for the kids, who are now living with Eric’s sister Katie.

Greg Skordas: I can’t think of anything worse as a child to lose your father, except to know that it was because of your mother. I mean, think about that.

---

Produced by Ruth Chenetz, Asena Basak and Betsy Shuller. Elena DiFiore and Ryan Smith are the development producers. Emma Steele is the field producer. Alicia Tejada is the coordinating producer. Megan Kelly Brown is the associate producer. Michael Vele, Richard Barber, Marcus Balsam, Marlon Disla and Greg Kaplan are the editors. Anthony Batson is the senior producer. Nancy Kramer is the executive story editor. Judy Tygard is the executive producer.

In:

When Liahona Olayan thinks about her time on “American Idol” five years ago, the first thing that comes to mind isn’t how far she made it in the competition (all the way to the top 24) — or even the fact that millions of viewers watched her get scolded by “Idol” judge and pop star Katy Perry.

The 22-year-old singer still occasionally looks back on her “Idol” episodes, including Perry’s talking-to. As she watches it all unfold — everything from the successful audition with her older brother, Ammon, that had country star Luke Bryan “freaking out” to her elimination — the first thing that comes to mind is gratitude.

“To be on national TV and global stages as a 16-year-old is actually really difficult, and it’s a lot of pressure on a child, but I am so grateful for it,” Olayan said. “It needed to happen. Like the Lord, that was the only way he could shape me and show me what I’m capable of, and what I needed to learn and what I still have to develop, and how far I can go. And so I am really grateful for that experience.”

As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Olayan relied on her faith to navigate the ups and downs of a reality competition show like “American Idol.”

Her faith continues to be an anchor in her life as she pursues a career post-“Idol.”

In a recent interview with the Deseret News, the singer, who lives in Spanish Fork, Utah, reflected on “American Idol,” how serving a Latter-day Saint mission has made her a better artist, and her new music.

Getting scolded by Katy Perry

Family photos hang all throughout the home in Utah County where Olayan lives with her parents and younger siblings.

The singer is the second oldest of nine, and the oldest daughter in the family. She speaks with pride about being a role model for her younger siblings, especially her sisters, and laughs when she talks about how she hides away in her bedroom closet to record her music — usually with a blanket over her head to help mute the noise that is a given in her home.

“It gets so loud,” she said.

But she wouldn’t have it any other way.

Olayan has a close bond with her siblings. So when she was on Season 19 of “American Idol,” competing alongside her older brother, Ammon, it hit her hard when he was eliminated.

It was Ammon who had inspired her to pursue music and songwriting in the first place. The two siblings, who are just a year apart in age, had previously collaborated on an EP in 2019 and were featured together on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ 2020 youth theme album.

Olayan was emotional as she moved forward on “Idol” without her brother — and Perry didn’t hesitate to call her out for it.

“You’re wasting everybody’s time,” Perry told Olayan when the then-teenager appeared glum during a duet with a fellow “Idol” contestant. “You were being defeated the whole time. … You took this whole ship down.”

Despite that harsh lecture, Perry and the other “Idol” judges ended up advancing Olayan to the next round of the competition. Perry would later tell the teenager she shouldn’t think she’s nothing without her brother, which Olayan said motivated her to keep moving forward.

“It may have hurt in those moments, but honestly, I’m so grateful for it,” Olayan said, reflecting on Perry’s criticism. “Katy Perry believed in me in a lot of ways. … She wouldn’t have said those things if she didn’t see the potential I had.”

After reaching the top 24 on “Idol,” Olayan continued to perform with Ammon. The siblings released another EP in 2022, but then put their careers on pause to serve missions for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — Ammon in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and Liahona in Puebla, Mexico.

Liahona Olayan believed from an early age she would serve a mission — but she never could have anticipated how her mission would point her toward a solo career that is gaining momentum.

Going on a mission

When she was getting ready to leave for Mexico in 2023, Olayan found herself surrounded by exciting career opportunities — including auditioning for the lead role in Disney’s live-action “Moana.”

But going on her mission wound up setting her up for even more success, she said.

In Mexico, Olayan wasn’t really recognized for her time on “American Idol.” She was, however, recognized for her church performances — including the song “Good Day” from the Strive to Be 2020 youth album, which has over 16 million streams on Spotify.

That helped open doors to sharing the gospel, Olayan said. Often with a ukulele in hand, she was able to testify of her love of Christ through singing on the streets and buses, and during missionary meetings and baptisms.

“I have so many experiences there that I would never trade for the world,” she said. “That was the first time in my life that I realized how profound music is. … I didn’t know how much it could change someone’s life until I went on the mission and was able to share it and see it for myself, with my own eyes.”

Three weeks after returning home to Utah, to her large, close-knit family, Olayan was in Los Angeles working on her debut solo album. She said the transition was so smooth, in part, because her mission helped her to learn things more quickly.

“The mission has made me a way better singer, a way better performer,” she said. “It’s helped me to develop my talents way quicker, way faster.”

Roughly eight months after her return, Olayan released “Just Me, Liahona,” a multigenre album that showcases her fluent Spanish and features everything from Latin pop to hip-hop and funk.

That music, and her newer music on the horizon, she said, is an extension of her missionary work.

“Anything and everything I do, I always want to help people, and if I can’t do that as a singer, then I’m failing, and I’m failing with my gift the Lord has given to me,” she said.

Liahona’s mission as an artist

Olayan describes herself as a clean pop artist. She writes and performs music that her seven younger siblings would feel comfortable listening to and seeing in concert.

That includes one of her newest songs, “Elegance,” which came out in late April.

On April 24, the day she released the song, Olayan said she was on an “all-time high” as she watched the message behind it gain traction online.

“Elegance,” she said, is a song about the empowerment she feels in dressing modestly — a message that has been on her mind since her teenage years.

“My standards have been put to the test anywhere and everywhere I go. And especially in the music industry … it’s tested every day,” she said. “I remember many times on ‘American Idol’ they would try to dress me certain ways.

“As a 16-year-old being there by myself … me being able to stand my ground and say ‘no’ was very shocking to a lot of (people). … But at the end of the day, I realized, like, I don’t care. I live to please the creator, not the created.”

Olayan said she’s received some pushback online for her new music and this direction in her career. But it pales in comparison, she said, to the support she has from her family, faith and fans.

“My mom always taught me there is no excuse to compromise your standards ever. There is no amount of fame, money, fashion, status that is worth giving up who you are,” she said. “Because once you give that up, who are you anyways? What do you have left?”

On a reality competition show like “American Idol,” Olayan couldn’t always perform the music she wanted. Each round had specific requirements and sometimes, the singer said, it felt confining.

Now, she’s releasing music and performing on her own terms.

She’s thinking of working on another solo album later this year, but in the meantime, she’ll be releasing singles throughout the summer.

“Every song I release from here on out is by my own doing,” she said. “I feel freer than ever, and like, this is who I am. I’m sure I’m going to grow from here, but at this moment, this is me. … I’m just very grateful to finally be able to be who I am.”

Two Utah political strategists say they were inundated with texts from concerned friends after Kevin O’Leary publicly accused critics of his massive Utah data center project of having ties to the Chinese Communist Party (1).

Gabi Finlayson and Jackie Morgan, co-founders of Elevate Strategies (2), found themselves at the center of a firestorm after O’Leary made the remarks during a segment on Fox Business. The pair, who have worked on Democratic campaigns and run Elevate Utah — a political content platform where they’ve publicly opposed the proposed Stratos Project — said they were blindsided by the allegations.

Must Read

• Robert Kiyosaki issues grim warning for baby boomers. Many could be ‘wiped out’ and homeless ‘all over’ the country. How to protect yourself now

“These are proxies for the Chinese government, is my argument, and if they’re not — because I want them to be able to defend their names,” O’Leary said. “Come out, come out wherever you are.”

The debate stems from a proposed 40,000-acre artificial intelligence data center development in Box Elder County’s Hansel Valley that is projected to be more than twice as large as Manhattan (3).

Why communities are pushing back

Rather than backing down after being called out, Finlayson and Morgan responded to O’Leary with a sense of humor. The two took to social media and turned O’Leary into the punchline, teasing his recognizable habit of wearing flip-flops with a suit during television appearances (4).

“The only foreign operative here is a Canadian wealthy person trying to ruin our state,” Finlayson told Business Insider (1).

Still, the exchange points to a much larger issue playing out in communities across the country. Public skepticism around AI data centers is mounting, with seven in 10 Americans saying they oppose having artificial intelligence facilities built in their local area, according to Gallup (5).

Similar to Finlayson and Morgan, residents have voiced concerns over how these projects could affect water resources, raise utility costs and change the character of their communities.

Those concerns may feel especially relevant in Utah, where electricity prices have already risen. Residential power costs in the state increased 15.2% between May 2024 and May 2025 — the third-largest jump nationwide, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (6). Across the U.S., electricity prices increased by about 6.5% during the same period.

Concerns around resource use have also drawn attention from state leaders. Utah Governor Spencer Cox said in a post on X that he requested the project developer release a public water plan showing the development would not harm the Great Salt Lake (7) . He added that water use should be publicly reported and said the project should not reduce water flowing into the lake.

O’Leary’s team pushes back on criticism

O’Leary did not respond to Business Insider’s request for comment, but Paul Palandjian, CEO of O’Leary Ventures, clarified the company’s position.

According to Palandjian, the firm is not alleging that any particular individual is acting as a foreign operative and instead wants more transparency around who is financially backing opposition efforts tied to the project.

Read More: Millionaires under 43 hold just 25% of their wealth in stocks — here’s where their money is going instead

“To be clear about Elevate: We accept that Elevate’s principals are American political strategists. We are not contesting that,” Palandjian told Business Insider (1). “What we have asked, and continue to ask, is for full donor transparency from the organizations that are funding the opposition to this project.”

Palandjian said the company recognizes the concerns being raised by residents and emphasized what O’Leary Ventures sees as the project’s economic upside. He estimates the development may generate roughly 4,000 construction jobs during its 10- to 15-year buildout.

O’Leary has also suggested that some of the pushback surrounding data centers stems from perceptions that no longer reflect how the industry has changed (8). He argued that the technology and energy systems supporting these facilities have progressed considerably and said he hopes the Utah project can serve as an example of responsible development.

Even as companies highlight the potential benefits of data center projects, questions around their environmental footprint have become more common as AI infrastructure rapidly expands. Some large facilities can use up to five-million gallons of water daily — an amount comparable to the needs of a town of roughly 10,000 to 50,000 residents (9).

The bigger question around AI’s growth

According to a Brookings analysis, the rise of AI is leading to a boom in data center construction (10), with tech companies saying these projects can bring jobs and more tax revenue to communities.

But researchers say many residents and policymakers are becoming worried about the strain large facilities could put on local power grids and electricity costs. With many households already feeling squeezed by rising expenses, Brookings noted that growing energy demand from data centers could add even more pressure and raise questions about who ends up paying the price.

Still, O’Leary argues his Utah project will be different. In a video posted on Facebook, he said his background gives him a unique perspective (11), describing himself as the only data-center developer with a degree in environmental studies.

“We want it to be the shining example of how you do this,” he said. Whether residents buy into that vision remains an open question.

What To Read Next

Join 250,000+ readers and get Moneywise’s best stories and exclusive interviews first — clear insights curated and delivered weekly. Subscribe now.

Article Sources

We rely only on vetted sources and credible third-party reporting. For details, see ourethics and guidelines.

Business Insider (1), (8); TikTok (2); The Verge (3); Google (4); Gallup (5); Axios (6); X (7); Environmental and Energy Study Institute (9); Brookings Institution (10); Facebook (11).

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.

Utah political consultant Gabi Finlayson was driving out of a canyon last week when she got the news that she had been accused of being a Chinese government operative. 

She was driving to a speaking engagement in central Utah with her colleague, Jackie Morgan. When their car climbed out of the canyon and back into cell service, their phones were going off. 

“Jackie and I each had like five text messages saying, you know, are you okay, did you see this, it’s gonna get worse before it gets better, but just hang in there.” They weren’t sure what happened, Finlayson said, until someone sent them the video. 

Kevin O’Leary, the Shark Tank billionaire investor trying to build a 40,000-acre data center campus in Finlayson and Morgan’s home state, had gone on Fox News. His “guys” had done a “deep dig into the IP addresses,” he said, and found “two cells inside of Utah” affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party: Finlayson and Morgan’s group, Elevate Strategies, as well as the nonprofit Alliance for a Better Utah. 

Finlayson and Morgan call the claim an out-and-out lie motivated by their opposition to a controversial Utah data center. “You don’t wake up in the morning often thinking, like, maybe I’ll get accused of sedition today on Fox News by Kevin O’Leary, but here we are,” Finlayson told me. “I’d probably get paid a lot more if I was” being paid by a foreign government, Elizabeth Huntchings, of Alliance for a Better Utah, told Fox News. 

They spoke against the Stratos data center not because they’re being paid to do so, Finlayson said, but because it seemed like something that had been “very much imposed upon people”—a massive construction project undertaken with very little public knowledge, that could increase Utah’s net greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent, as one University of Utah professor estimates. 

To O’Leary, though, red spooks are the only reasonable explanation. “Who would want us to stop building our electrical grid? Who would want to stop us from having the compute capacity to develop AI? Which adversary would want that? There’s only one, it’s China,” O’Leary told Fox Business News host Maria Bartiromo earlier this month. 

This narrative—that hyperscale data centers like O’Leary’s in Utah must be built, as a matter of national security—echoes a 2025 executive order by Donald Trump accelerating the federal permit process for data centers. And more and more data center investors are picking it up—insisting that their projects must be built in order to out-compute China. 

“It is a national security imperative for the United States to achieve and maintain unquestioned and unchallenged global technological dominance,” Trump wrote in his 2025 executive order. (The president has also invested millions of dollars in companies that build data center infrastructure.) 

But Finlayson and Morgan, in Utah, spend their working lives support local Democratic political campaigns—often a long shot in a Republican supermajority state—andrun a Substack on local news and politics. It’s an affiliation that may not endear them to O’Leary, who says he will provide proof, still to come, that his critics are foreign operatives; he has as yet not done so. His investment firm did not respond to multiple requests for comment. 

Finlayson says she’s part of a wave of real, unpaid outrage among Utahns. “Almost everyone in the entire state is so mad about this,” she said. “There’s obviously the folks that are concerned about the environmental impacts—I mean, it’s the largest proposed data center in the entire country—but then also you have a lot of more conservative people that are ranchers and farmers, people that live in these rural areas, that don’t want this infrastructure.” The backlash against data center construction has been called the “most bipartisan issue since beer”—and in Utah, that shows. 

In the west, Finlayson said, “we kind of have this libertarian streak”: her community does not take well to “investors and rich people wanting to come in and just impose this thing on people without really significant community input.” In effect, she said,  “the government is telling you what to do, and they’re not interested in having any feedback.” 

Utahns have given O’Leary and the data center’s other developers quite a lot of feedback. Hundreds showed up to protest at a Box Elder County commission meeting where the data center was approved earlier this month, and thousands of people filed formal protests against the data center’s water rights applications. 

While it’s not clear that overturning the county commission’s approval would stop the data center’s construction—it has already been approved by Utah’s Military Installation Development Authority, a powerful state agency—one Box Elder County group wants to put the project on the ballot for a voter referendum. 

Caving to public pressure, the Utah legislature announced Wednesday that it will study the impacts of the proposed data center on the ever-shrinking Great Salt Lake’s water—a timely move, as Utah declared a statewide drought emergency this week. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican, has publicly acknowledged that the rollout of O’Leary’s Stratos data center “was not good.” And more protests against the project are scheduled to descend on the Utah State Capitol during Memorial Day weekend. 

Finlayson is heartened by the pushback. “This is not about where you fall in the political spectrum, it’s about who has power to make decisions over your life and who doesn’t,” she said.  “Oftentimes, it feels like we don’t get to decide what happens to us, and we’re just getting things imposed on us by the government or by the wealthy.” 

In Republican-supermajority Utah, she said, this kind of alliance-building means a great deal. “I think that people that have had money and have had power for a long time forget what it looks like when real people have a real problem with a real issue, and they really push back.”

This article was first published in the Ute Insiders newsletter. Sign up to receive the newsletter in your inbox each Wednesday night.

For years under longtime offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig, Utah didn’t have a dedicated quarterbacks coach, as Ludwig took on the dual roles himself during much of his second stint at Utah.

That changed with Jason Beck, who brought Koy Detmer Jr. with him from New Mexico in an analyst role that also had him spend time coaching the quarterbacks.

When Kevin McGiven took over as Utah’s offensive coordinator this winter, it didn’t take long for him to hire a quarterbacks coach, adding Ryan Gunderson to his staff about five days after he was hired to run Utah’s offense. Though McGiven has coached quarterbacks at various stops in his career, including at Oregon State and Utah State, and will certainly give his expertise to Devon Dampier and Byrd Ficklin, he also brought in Gunderson to be a dedicated quarterbacks coach.

“He’s a good one, man. I’ve gone against him. So we were in the Rose Bowl playing UCLA and DTR was up and down the field on us and Ryan was a big part of that. So (he) brings a ton of experience, but he’s also a pretty good calming influence for those guys when stuff’s hitting the fan. He’s a very good teacher and you can ask those quarterbacks.”

—  Utah head coach Morgan Scalley on Utah QBs coach Ryan Gunderson

A career backup quarterback at Oregon State, Gunderson broke into the coaching world under Mike Riley as a graduate assistant and eventually shifted into a director of player personnel role and followed Riley to Nebraska.

From there, he moved into on-field coaching as San Jose State’s quarterback coach in 2017 and linked up with McGiven, who became the Spartans’ offensive coordinator in 2018. The two formed a successful partnership, with Gunderson named a nominee for the 2019 Broyles Award after the Spartans threw for 338 yards per game, fourth nationally.

He also brings two years of offensive coordinator experience, though Oregon State’s offense during his stint there during the 2024 and 2025 seasons never rose above 95th in the nation in points per game.

Gunderson also had a stop from 2021-2023 as the quarterbacks coach at UCLA, helping develop Dorian Thompson-Robinson. Gunderson’s work in Westwood caught Morgan Scalley’s eye, especially in a 42-32 loss in which Thompson-Robinson passed for 299 yards and four touchdowns.

“He’s a good one, man. I’ve gone against him. So we were in the Rose Bowl playing UCLA and DTR was up and down the field on us and Ryan was a big part of that. So (he) brings a ton of experience, but he’s also a pretty good calming influence for those guys when stuff’s hitting the fan. He’s a very good teacher and you can ask those quarterbacks,” Scalley said.

One point of emphasis from McGiven and Gunderson this spring was improving each quarterback’s pre-snap reads and post-snap progressions in order to be more efficient and make better decisions.

“There’s certain guys that are going to count to four or five and they’re going to go boom, boom, they’re going to scan the whole field. We want to give them tools to where they don’t have to count that high every time. They can simplify or cut down the progression,” Gunderson said.

One of the key points that Gunderson has instilled into his quarterbacks is “play slow pre-snap, you can play fast post-snap.”

“Giving them tools to cancel things out pre-snap is what we’ve focused on a lot,” Gunderson said. “We’ve asked them at times to read the full field, but there’s different types of progressions. So it’s not always as simple as just saying, ‘No, no, no, yes.’ Getting them used to what those different progressions are, when to use them, when not to use them.”

While Gunderson and the rest of Utah’s offensive staff are trying to develop Dampier and Ficklin into more complete quarterbacks, they also are acutely aware of what makes each of them great, and a big part of that is their running and playmaking ability.

“I understand that there’s a playmaking ability to both of them. The sequence for me is you need to make the play. So if we call a play and it’s the coverage that we wanted, I need you to hit that throw,” Gunderson said. “Then after you make the play, you make a play. There’s going to be opportunities that come about where I need you to go make a play. Then when the defense makes a good call or gets us in a situation we don’t want to be in, don’t make a bad play worse.”

This spring, there was a focus on Dampier and Ficklin playing within the confines of the offense — which is tailored to their strengths — with the expectation that things will be different in game situations.

“I think we all understand that when the games come around, there’s a different element to them. You want the wild mustang to be a wild mustang, but we also want to kind of keep them on that path,” Gunderson said. “So don’t take the playmaker out of the playmaker, and that’s kind of my goal. You got to let them play a little bit too.”

The reviews from Dampier and Ficklin on what Gunderson has meant to their development have been positive.

“Huge development, honestly. Every day I feel like I’m actually learning something every single day. He’s very hard on me,” Dampier said. “He wants me to be great. He asks me all the time, ‘Do you want to be in the NFL?’ And I answer yes. So he tells me I got to get better. I got to fix these corrections. He’s been a huge help. I feel like I took a lot of strides this spring and looking forward to the fall.”

Ficklin has also seen improvement as he moves into his sophomore season after a freshman campaign that saw him contribute a lot for the Utes.

“Coach Gundy has been a really big part, whether that be full-field progressions to get the ball out of my hand quick to just knowing coverages,” Ficklin said. “He’s been teaching me a lot and that’s a big thing I really like about coach Gundy. He’s a really, really smart football player. He might’ve been a pocket passer back in his day, but that’s also really helping me to be a better quarterback as well.”

As Utah heads toward the 2026 season, it will need its quarterbacks to keep making strides, and Gunderson will be a big part of facilitating that.

In case you missed it

After a season-ending injury, Rabbit Evans is armed with a different perspective as he returns to lead Utah’s safeties.

From the archives

Extra points

OREM, Utah, May 22, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Utah Valley University (UVU) is pleased to announce the appointment of Spencer Magleby, Ph.D., as dean of the Smith College of Engineering and Technology (SCET), effective June 16, 2026.

Magleby brings extensive experience in academic administration, curriculum innovation, and institutional leadership. He is a professor emeritus of mechanical engineering at Brigham Young University (BYU) and served in key leadership roles, including associate dean and director of the BYU Honors Program, with a strong focus on student development, collaborative programs, industry relationships, and academic excellence. An internationally recognized researcher in compliant mechanisms, Magleby’s pioneering work has resulted in over 40 patents and 250 publications spanning theory, technology development, and advanced mechanical design, and the advisement of hundreds of graduate students.

He holds a B.S. and M.S. in civil engineering from BYU and a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is deeply engaged in advancing engineering education, having co-founded a nationally recognized, industry-sponsored capstone design program. He has published on Capstone program design, leadership development, and study abroad for engineers and technologists.

UVU looks forward to the leadership and exceptional expertise Magleby will contribute to SCET. Magleby is poised to elevate the college’s mission, foster academic excellence, and strengthen connections within the UVU community.

To learn more about the Smith College of Engineering and Technology please visit uvu.edu/scet.

###

About Utah Valley University
Utah Valley University believes in the power and potential of every student. Our work is guided by a commitment to exceptional care, exceptional accountability, and exceptional results. We provide a high-quality education that is both affordable and accessible. From certificates to master’s degrees, UVU offers flexible, relevant programs grounded in hands-on learning and real-world experiences, ensuring that students graduate with career-ready skills and are ready to receive a strong return on investment. As an open-enrollment university, we invite students to come as they are, and they leave prepared to make an immediate impact in their careers and communities.

CONTACT: Sharon Turner Utah Valley University 801-863-6807 sharon.turner@uvu.edu

The Key Takeaways for this article were generated with the assistance of large language models and reviewed by our editorial team. The article, itself, is solely human-written.