Honolulu County Deputy Prosecutor Joel Garner began his closing argument in Gerhardt Konig’s attempted murder trial today by telling the jury, “A motive. A beating. A confession.

Ladies and gentlemen, beyond a reasonable doubt, the state has proven that on March 24, 2025, Gerhardt Konig tried to kill his wife, Arielle.” “The state has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Gerhardt Konig committed the offense of attempted murder in the second degree.”

02:00 “Plan A, the push. The intent was to kill. When Plan A didn’t work, the defendant moved on to Plan B. Plan B, inject her with the syringe, knock her out, push her off the cliff. The intent behind plan B was to kill Plan C, when the first two plans didn’t work, beat her with the rock, knock her out, drag her over, or just simply kill her outright.”

04:35 “The law treats somebody the same, whether they’re successful or not. The law treats you the same, no matter how good you are at executing that plan, no matter how good you are at actually succeeding in killing somebody, the law treats you the same as an example, somebody who tries to shoot somebody who points a gun and tries to end a life but misses they’ve committed attempted murder.”

06:28 “Arielle told you about her treatment, her medical treatment, her recovery. She showed you the scars that she carries to this day. She showed you the scars on her head, where she will never grow hair again, and everything that Arielle said is corroborated. These are the credibility factors. These are listed in your instructions that you should be considering for every witness who testified. And we are not going to go through all of them right now, but there’s a couple that are relevant for Arielle here. First appearance, demeanor, intelligence, candor, frankness. Ariel testified in a straightforward, coherent manner. She testified clearly. There were no histrionics, barely any tears. It was straightforward. This happened, then this happened, then this happened. It was not over dramatized. It was not over exaggerated. It was straightforward and simple and coherent. She was open to cross examination.”

12:28 “You’ve seen the photo of Arielle from the front. You’ve seen what’s missing from her head. You’ve seen that there is a chunk of her scalp that is gone. It’s right there in that photo, and you’ve seen that she didn’t just have scalp injuries. She had injuries above her eye. She had injuries below her eye.”

18:22 “Maybe you thought to yourself, well, Amanda and Sarah only saw the end. The evidence shows that Amanda and Sarah didn’t see the end of the incident. They caused the end of the incident because when they showed up, that is the only thing that stopped the defendant.”

22:40 “Defendant’s actions corroborate Arielles testimony. First, he fled the scene. Second, he collected the evidence from the scene. He collected Arielle’s phone, he collected Arielle’s purse, and he collected those syringes. He took all those items from the scene and he disposed of them.”

24:03 “The defendant in this case has testified, and you need to judge his testimony the exact same way that you judge anybody’s. At the beginning of this trial, you heard a theme, some alliteration with a theme, you know, unwilling or unfaithful, unwilling, untrue. But ladies and gentlemen, after listening to the defendant’s testimony, you only knew one word to summarize it, one word: unbelievable.”

27:38 “This is the photo of the defendant immediately after his arrest. This is the photo of the defendant almost eight hours after the incident, up on the trail, after the defendant tried to kill Arielle. Yes, there’s a small dark spot on his cheek. Is it a bruise? Is it dirt? I don’t know. This is Arielle. The idea that this same rock caused these different injuries is unbelievable, ladies and gentlemen.”

30:07 “Defendant is contradicted by Amanda and Sarah. Somehow, Arielle finally let go of his private parts, and then he just stands there and looks he’s not on the ground writhing in pain. Does that make sense? He says that she held on so hard that he couldn’t escape. Does it make sense that afterwards he would just stand there and stare? No. Defendant is contradicted by the physical evidence. He’s contradicted by the fact that there’s no blood of his up there. There’s no evidence of injuries that support what defendant says happened.”

32:11 “He made the plan to go hiking that day. He didn’t share with Arielle what hike they were going on. He didn’t share the details of that hike with Arielle. He didn’t share the dangers of that hike with Arielle, because his plan was to push her off that cliff.”

37:07 “You’ve got a list of other included offenses. You got a list of a bunch of assault charges that are included in the attempted murder in second degree charge. When you think about those, just think one thing he did more.”