4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #78

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
wary said:
But why would BF’s camp be leaking material designed to sound as though BF does have exculpatory testimony to give?
Click to expand...

Makes no sense to me. I am still in favor of "Mirror doesn't know what it's talking about/is using rumor" until we learn more.

However, the way I'd answer your question is that the Defense wants to sow the seeds of reasonable doubt. The Defense has every reason to "leak" the document if they want the public to think there were disagreeing accounts about the man seen in the house that night. So I imagine it was the Defense who subpoenaed her and then leaked.

At any rate, there aren't that many possibilities on the table. Either it's fiction or it's true. If true, someone leaked it. It could have traveled along several different paths, I just find it strange that a non-investigative newspaper (Mirror) who doesn't cite a source has this news and no one else does.

Why would anyone leak to the Mirror in the first place? $$$ comes to mind.

At any rate, no one in Nevada or Washington is bound by the gag order, so it's possible that someone in BF's attorney's office leaked it (as has happened in other cases where there was no gag order).

It's the affidavit by PI Bitonti that apparently contains the information. So it has occurred to me that the PI, himself, might have something to gain by getting his name out there. He resides in WA, is not part of the case, and is not bound by the gag order (but how does he know what BF thinks happened?)

That would be one Mr. Bitonti. It was his affidavit that support the exculpatory evidence from BF (how he knew this - who he talked to, etc - would necessarily be people close to BF or to BF herself). I doubt he made it up out of whole cloth, but that's possible. At any rate, I do wonder if Mr Bitonti (who does not live in ID and is not bound by the gag order) could be the one. He may care more about PR for himself and also, may not be legally precluded from sharing with the press. BF may have, at one time, spoken to him (that's the only way I can figure out how he has an affidavit to make about her testimony - but why? why did she speak to him, I wonder? If she didn't - if he got the information through a third party, that's really shaky as a grounds for the subpoena, IMO. So either BF talked to Bitonti or Bitonti talked to a friend or relative of BF who claimed personal knowledge of what she knew/

I have no clue, in the end. IMO. Just guessing.
 
Last edited:
10ofRods said:
Makes no sense to me. I am still in favor of "Mirror doesn't know what it's talking about/is using rumor" until we learn more.

However, the way I'd answer your question is that the Defense wants to sow the seeds of reasonable doubt. The Defense has every reason to "leak" the document if they want the public to think there were disagreeing accounts about the man seen in the house that night. So I imagine it was the Defense who subpoenaed her and then leaked.

At any rate, there aren't that many possibilities on the table. Either it's fiction or it's true. If true, someone leaked it. It could have traveled along several different paths, I just find it strange that a non-investigative newspaper (Mirror) who doesn't cite a source has this news and no one else does.

Why would anyone leak to the Mirror in the first place?

I have no clue. IMO.
Click to expand...
There are only TWO affidavits that we know about: one is the PCA


and one is recently filed in Nevada by BK's investigator:


The Mirror article is a bunch of hooey, and it is on all the sleuth websites, youtube, etc, LIKE CRAZY, and all the CRAZIES are taking it for FACT, which it IS NOT. IMO
 
10ofRods said:
Makes no sense to me. I am still in favor of "Mirror doesn't know what it's talking about/is using rumor" until we learn more.

However, the way I'd answer your question is that the Defense wants to sow the seeds of reasonable doubt. The Defense has every reason to "leak" the document if they want the public to think there were disagreeing accounts about the man seen in the house that night. So I imagine it was the Defense who subpoenaed her and then leaked.

At any rate, there aren't that many possibilities on the table. Either it's fiction or it's true. If true, someone leaked it. It could have traveled along several different paths, I just find it strange that a non-investigative newspaper (Mirror) who doesn't cite a source has this news and no one else does.

Why would anyone leak to the Mirror in the first place? $$$ comes to mind.

At any rate, no one in Nevada or Washington is bound by the gag order, so it's possible that someone in BF's attorney's office leaked it (as has happened in other cases where there was no gag order).

It's the affidavit by PI Bitonti that apparently contains the information. So it has occurred to me that the PI, himself, might have something to gain by getting his name out there. He resides in WA, is not part of the case, and is not bound by the gag order (but how does he know what BF thinks happened?)

That would be one Mr. Bitonti. It was his affidavit that support the exculpatory evidence from BF (how he knew this - who he talked to, etc - would necessarily be people close to BF or to BF herself). I doubt he made it up out of whole cloth, but that's possible. At any rate, I do wonder if Mr Bitonti (who does not live in ID and is not bound by the gag order) could be the one. He may care more about PR for himself and also, may not be legally precluded from sharing with the press. BF may have, at one time, spoken to him (that's the only way I can figure out how he has an affidavit to make about her testimony - but why? why did she speak to him, I wonder? If she didn't - if he got the information through a third party, that's really shaky as a grounds for the subpoena, IMO. So either BF talked to Bitonti or Bitonti talked to a friend or relative of BF who claimed personal knowledge of what she knew/

I have no clue, in the end. IMO. Just guessing.
Click to expand...
https://int.nyt.com/data/documentto...ial-witness-warrant/43954cdb14544969/full.pdf
@10ofRods
Look at EXHIBIT 3, Affidavit of Richard Bitonti.....

IMOO all they have is her interviews with police, and opportunity to sow those seeds of doubt.
 
katydid23 said:
Aren't they using the DNA on the sheath to prove BK was wielding the knife, and the car is then a clue to the time the murderer was fleeing the scene?
Click to expand...

Interesting opinion with video

Opinion | Is the DNA in the Idaho case foolproof?

DNA analysis was a revolution in forensics, but like every form of scientific evidence it has the potential for error. At its best, DNA testing can tell you whose genes were found in a particular location — but it can’t tell you how they got there. ...

Recent technological advancements allowing scientists to analyze increasingly small or contaminated DNA samples further complicate the process. While these new techniques can yield valuable insights, they require more subjective judgment and thus are far more likely to produce false matches than traditional testing. DNA samples are also sometimes mishandled or tampered with, compromising results ...

Furthermore, forensic evidence should rarely, if ever, be the sole basis for arrest or prosecution ...

(My apologies if already posted.)
 
DeDee said:
Interesting opinion with video

Opinion | Is the DNA in the Idaho case foolproof?

DNA analysis was a revolution in forensics, but like every form of scientific evidence it has the potential for error. At its best, DNA testing can tell you whose genes were found in a particular location — but it can’t tell you how they got there. ...

Recent technological advancements allowing scientists to analyze increasingly small or contaminated DNA samples further complicate the process. While these new techniques can yield valuable insights, they require more subjective judgment and thus are far more likely to produce false matches than traditional testing. DNA samples are also sometimes mishandled or tampered with, compromising results ...

Furthermore, forensic evidence should rarely, if ever, be the sole basis for arrest or prosecution ...

(My apologies if already posted.)
Click to expand...

Interesting stuff. I am heartened by the fact that this particular DNA was 1) found on a use point (so the question of "where it came from" is moot, to me - someone used it as a sheath, that's how it got there; 2) single source (not reported as partial or degraded OR as a mixture - it was just one person's DNA).

So it sidesteps both of those problems, IMO. And of course, it's not the sole basis for the arrest. The car video and the phone data are awfully damning as well.

IMO.
 
SpiderFalcon said:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documentto...ial-witness-warrant/43954cdb14544969/full.pdf
@10ofRods
Look at EXHIBIT 3, Affidavit of Richard Bitonti.....

IMOO all they have is her interviews with police, and opportunity to sow those seeds of doubt.
Click to expand...
For those interested, the relevant part starts on page 9 or so. Thank you so much @SpiderFalcon for finding the whole thing. It resolves several questions.

The Mirror didn't get its information from any affidavit filed in this matter. Its source remains unknown and, IMO, probably doesn't exist.

Mr Bitonti says nothing new. He brings no new facts. He says the same things we already knew - BF was in the house that night, talked to LE, said some things that defense believes is relevant.

And you are right - it looks like he was hired merely to go through documents and look for crumbs. He has no new information about BF beyond what was already available to both sides via discovery.

Much ado about nothing. Preliminary Hearing is going to be something else, though. I feel for BF.

IMO.
 
katydid23 said:
Aren't they using the DNA on the sheath to prove BK was wielding the knife, and the car is then a clue to the time the murderer was fleeing the scene?
Click to expand...

Nope. My read of hte PCA is that they are using the car to establish he was at the scene of the crime. In doing so, they cannot then turn around and determine the time of the crime by when his car was there. That would defy logic, IMO.
 
DeDee said:
Interesting opinion with video

Opinion | Is the DNA in the Idaho case foolproof?

DNA analysis was a revolution in forensics, but like every form of scientific evidence it has the potential for error. At its best, DNA testing can tell you whose genes were found in a particular location — but it can’t tell you how they got there. ...

Recent technological advancements allowing scientists to analyze increasingly small or contaminated DNA samples further complicate the process. While these new techniques can yield valuable insights, they require more subjective judgment and thus are far more likely to produce false matches than traditional testing. DNA samples are also sometimes mishandled or tampered with, compromising results ...

Furthermore, forensic evidence should rarely, if ever, be the sole basis for arrest or prosecution ...

(My apologies if already posted.)
Click to expand...
Similar to the sex offender's DNA found on Suzanne Morphew's bike and in her car.

lawandcrime.com

Barry Morphew Murder Case Shocker: Unidentified Male DNA Linked to Three Sexual Assaults in Two States Found in Victim Suzanne Morphew's Car

The defense further noted that unknown male DNA was also discovered on the rear cushion of Suzanne Morphew's car and on the handlebars of her bicycle.
lawandcrime.com lawandcrime.com
 
DeDee said:
Interesting opinion with video

Opinion | Is the DNA in the Idaho case foolproof?

DNA analysis was a revolution in forensics, but like every form of scientific evidence it has the potential for error. At its best, DNA testing can tell you whose genes were found in a particular location — but it can’t tell you how they got there. ...

Recent technological advancements allowing scientists to analyze increasingly small or contaminated DNA samples further complicate the process. While these new techniques can yield valuable insights, they require more subjective judgment and thus are far more likely to produce false matches than traditional testing. DNA samples are also sometimes mishandled or tampered with, compromising results ...

Furthermore, forensic evidence should rarely, if ever, be the sole basis for arrest or prosecution ...

(My apologies if already posted.)
Click to expand...
I agree with all of the above. And if the DNA match came back to someone that was found to have no connection at all to the crime scene, and had an alibi or a physical disability etc, then we would nullify the importance of the DNA.

But the Elantra was connected to the crime separately from the DNA. And possibly there are other connections we have heard about, which could be very incriminating. [the IDs in BK's glove box?]
 
BeginnerSleuther said:
We haven't seen the PI's affidavit. Why are you sure it's false?
Click to expand...

We have seen the PI’s affidavit. It’s in the second link in the post you quoted. Scroll down almost to the bottom—page 9 of 10. There’s ten points there, but all they add up to, in my opinion, is: “BF was in the house that night. She talked to LE, so we want to question her too.” (My wording, not theirs.)

There’s none of the naked man, running man details.

MOO
 
Another example of “Harpootlianing” like from the Murdaugh trial. You get around a gag order by filing motions that are public record. In that motion you make hints that there is evidence proving your client innocent, but you don’t have to actually prove anything. You’re playing to the potential jury pool.
If the defense truly wants to hear what this child knows, they need to depose her in Nevada. I doubt they actually will.
 
katydid23 said:
I agree with all of the above. And if the DNA match came back to someone that was found to have no connection at all to the crime scene, and had an alibi or a physical disability etc, then we would nullify the importance of the DNA.

But the Elantra was connected to the crime separately from the DNA. And possibly there are other connections we have heard about, which could be very incriminating. [the IDs in BK's glove box?]
Click to expand...

Exactly, and that's the point. If you're using the Elantra as evidence of BK's guilt, then you can't determine time of death by what time the Elantra left. That's like if I go to the grocery store and there's a robbery, the police determining what time the robbery happened by what time I was there. That doesn't fly. Instead, they need to determine what time the robbery happened, then determine if I was there at that time. You can't place a suspect at the scene of a crime by using the suspect to determine the time of the crime.

MOO.
 
wary said:
We have seen the PI’s affidavit. It’s in the second link in the post you quoted. Scroll down almost to the bottom—page 9 of 10. There’s ten points there, but all they add up to, in my opinion, is: “BF was in the house that night. She talked to LE, so we want to question her too.” (My wording, not theirs.)

There’s none of the naked man, running man details.

MOO
Click to expand...

Yes, I went back and deleted my post. I thought the page before it was blurred out. IMO, it doesn't make any sense that a judge would sign off on a subpoena based on that. IMO, some of the sealed documents we can't see contain more information than what is in that particular affidavit. I don't know the legality behind all this, but the details of what BF saw and heard were kept out of the affidavit on purpose, though it doesn't mean the judge doesn't know it and it doesn't mean it wasn't leaked.

MOO.
 
BeginnerSleuther said:
Exactly, and that's the point. If you're using the Elantra as evidence of BK's guilt, then you can't determine time of death by what time the Elantra left. That's like if I go to the grocery store and there's a robbery, the police determining what time the robbery happened by what time I was there. That doesn't fly. Instead, they need to determine what time the robbery happened, then determine if I was there at that time. You can't place a suspect at the scene of a crime by using the suspect to determine the time of the crime.

MOO.
Click to expand...
But you are ignoring the DNA on the sheath.
 
katydid23 said:
But you are ignoring the DNA on the sheath.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. But as you said, "And if the DNA match came back to someone that was found to have no connection at all to the crime scene, and had an alibi or a physical disability etc, then we would nullify the importance of the DNA. But the Elantra was connected to the crime separately from the DNA."

You can't use the Elantra to back up the DNA (i.e. as evidence), then use the Elantra to confirm time of death.

What if (and I know this isn't true, but hypothetically), it was revealed the time of death was actually at 6 am. Well, the Elantra was there at 4 am and gone by 6 am, so then what? Would the DNA still matter? Maybe, but it wouldn't be as strong on its own. That's why it's important to nail down time of death independent of the Elantra if you're going to use the Elantra (as a support for the DNA) to suggest BK was at the crime scene.

MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 183 more.
Total: 1,786 (members: 184, guests: 1,602)

Online statistics

Members online
184
Guests online
1,602
Total visitors
1,786
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,869
Messages
18,114,996
Members
230,991
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top