4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #86

[Boxer]

<snipped for focus>

So the issue with transferred-touch DNA, would be that BK may have never touched the sheath. He may have touched a door knob to open a door, and the person who next went through the door (let's call him person X) and touched the same door knob could have BK's DNA on his hand. Then if person X touched his knife sheath, person X could transfer BK's DNA onto the sheath.

BK would never have needed to touch the sheath himself for his DNA to get there. This is what these experts are saying, although not using BK's case as an example, but other cases with similar examples. They are saying that if a DNA sample is small enough, it could place a person in a place where he never went, and have his DNA on an object that he never touched.

Good article to explain transfer-touch DNA.

Single source DNA was found on the sheath.

The state will probably have to make assumptions like the examples you give if they don't have any evidence that BK obtained and possessed the Ka-Bar knife and sheath.

The question would then be how the jury reacts to assumptions vs evidence. JMO.

BK had like items, not any sort of stretch to have the K-bar.

 

[RANCH]

Single source DNA was found on the sheath.

BK had like items, not any sort of stretch to have the K-bar.

What is a like item?

 

[Boxer]

Okay. Does virtually impossible sound better to you?

Yes. That sounds good.

 

[Boxer]

What is a like item?

Knife, a gun.
A 80 dollar service knife is a fun thing to have. He wanted to be an Army Ranger at one time.

 

[RANCH]

Knife, a gun.

Almost everyone has access to a knife and a gun wasn't used in this crime.

I'm not following how the state can use that to any great advantage. JMO.

 

[Boxer]

N

Almost everyone has access to a knife and a gun wasn't used in this crime.

I'm not following how the state can use that to any great advantage. JMO.

There was a suggestion not having BKs receipt for the Kabar was a problem for the state. I am saying he had like items. The Kabar fits in with what he has.

 

[RANCH]

N

There was a suggestion not having BKs receipt for the Kabar was a problem for the state. I am saying he had like items. The Kabar fits in with what he has.

Do you think at trial the state will bring up the fact that BK had access to a gun but didn't use it in the murders?

 

[Idaho transplant]

Don't count the defense out yet.

We have a long way to go. Including jury selection which can make or break a case. JMO.

If this case goes to trial, what would be the strategy of a professional juror consultant hired by the DEFENSE? What type of juror would be an asset, what type would they want to avoid at all costs?

 

[RANCH]

If this case goes to trial, what would be the strategy of a professional juror consultant hired by the DEFENSE? What type of juror would be an asset, what type would they want to avoid at all costs?

They probably will want someone who may have had negative experiences with LE and the justice system and therefore will take a hard look at the states case.

They would probably try to exclude people who have been a victim of crime or are close to a crime victim.

JMO.

 

[Cool Cats]

The state will probably have to make assumptions like the examples you give if they don't have any evidence that BK obtained and possessed the Ka-Bar knife and sheath.

The question would then be how the jury reacts to assumptions vs evidence. JMO.

I don't understand the focus on having proof BK purchased a knife/sheath. Prosecution doesn't need that proof to convict him, they have what they need to convict him. ... 2 Cents

Knives were removed from his house doesn't mean it was the murder weapon. A knife purchase doesn't prove it is the murder weapon.

DNA on a sheath under a victim will be the big factor in convicting him. Single source DNA convicts people every day, super common and reliable.

DNA is not an assumption it is evidence.

 

[RANCH]

I don't understand the focus on having proof BK purchased a knife/sheath. Prosecution doesn't need that proof to convict him, they have what they need to convict him. ... 2 Cents

Knives were removed from his house doesn't mean it was the murder weapon. A knife purchase doesn't prove it is the murder weapon.

DNA on a sheath under a victim will be the big factor in convicting him. Touch DNA convicts people every day, super common and reliable.

I don't think that the state has to prove BK purchased a Ka-Bar knife/sheath to gain a conviction. Yes, DNA will be a big factor in this trial and will most likely be why BK gets convicted.

I do think that the defense will use any weakness it can find in the states case to their advantage. Will that be enough to get a hung jury? Or an acquittal? I don't know.

JMO.

 

[gremlin444]

Re: Planting DNA

The D said this:

In essence, the State argues that if the later STR testing is accurate then there is no reason to concern ourselves with how the State came to investigate Mr. Kohberger. State’s brief at 9. What the State’s argument asks this Court and Mr. Kohberger to assume is that the DNA on the sheath was placed there by Mr. Kohberger, and not someone else during an investigation that spans hundreds of members of law enforcement and apparently at least one lab the State refuses to name.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/062323%20Objection%20to%20States%20Motion%20for%20Protective%20Order.pdf

The prosecution replied with this

lf Defendant wishes to explore the theory that his DNA was planted on the Ka-Bar knife sheath, he is free to do so. But the family tree created by the FBI has no relevance to that theory.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/071423%20Reply%20In%20Support%20of%20Motion%20for%20Protectiive%20Order.pdf

The only person who used the word "planted" was the prosecutor. And subsequently, the press.
There is another alternative - transfer
Which is unintentional. MOO

I'm trying to figure out how an accidental transfer could occur in regards to the defense's own emphasis above on "an investigation that spans hundreds of members of law enforcement and apparently at least one lab."

As stated by defense themselves in the above document, on Nov 20 the ISP lab located the DNA on the sheath and performed STR analysis. At that point as of Nov 20, the DNA information from that sheath is now in the official system--no one can come and accidentally or deliberately put BK's DNA on that sheath.

So, that leaves us with before those test results were processed and in the system. The only recorded interaction between BK and a member of Idaho law enforcement was on August 21 during his stop for not wearing a seat belt by Latah County Sheriff Deputy Corporal Duke. There is no written report for that stop, and a request for body cam footage from that encounter was denied (this statement comes from about half way down in this article https://www.tri-cityherald.com/news/state/article275083811.html, and no I'm not confusing it with the Oct 14 WSU stop), so we don't know what physical interaction if any occurred.

If there is the smallest chance that somehow that CPL Duke somehow got BK DNA on his/her hands from perhaps handling BK's driver's license, I'm sure it could easily be verified whether or not that officer was present at the processing of the crime scene and the evidence. Though that would assume CPL Duke then transferred that DNA from their hands to their uniform shortly after the stop and it somehow stayed there until they were present at the crime scene and in the vicinity of the sheath. But it only transferred into the snap of sheath, not the broader flat surfaces.

Or we could say that after CPL Duke theoretically got BK's DNA on their hands from his driver's license, Duke immediately came in direct contact with an item of evidence at a crime scene and transferred BK's DNA to it. This item was then taken to the Meridian, ID ISP lab for processing. And that tiny bit of now twice transferred BK touch DNA is transferred a third time to a work surface/piece of equipment in that lab and evades cleaning until the lab receives the knife sheath and begins checking it for DNA. Then it transfers a fourth time to the clasp of the sheath.

I can't think of any other way in which a member of ISP could be connected to accidental transfer of BK touch DNA. Washington state law enforcement would have had no direct involvement at that point, right? According to the PCA, WSU police didn't even come up with BK's name/auto until Nov 29th. The WSU officer who stopped him for the intersection stuff wouldn't have any means of transferring DNA from that encounter to the ISP lab.

 

[Cool Cats]

I don't think that the state has to prove BK purchased a Ka-Bar knife/sheath to gain a conviction. Yes, DNA will be a big factor in this trial and will most likely be why BK gets convicted.

I do think that the defense will use any weakness it can find in the states case to their advantage. Will that be enough to get a hung jury? Or an acquittal? I don't know.

JMO.

I get your point of view, it is helpful to the defense if no knife purchase is found. This is absolutely true.

When the defense doesn't have an alternative suspect or good alibi to present, they make their case by poking holes in the prosecution's evidence piece by piece. This is basically what the defense says in their alibi Motion that they are going to do.

Find holes in DNA
Find holes in car videos
Find holes in cell tower records

 

[katydid23]

So the rebuttal is that the sheath DNA was planted? It sounds like they will be looking for jurors that don’t trust law enforcement.

That kind of thing might work if there were ZERO other connections to him. But if they do prove that was his car traveling to and from the King St house, and his cell was pinging the area during that same time period, then it will be hard to believe it was planted DNA.

 

[Boxer]

Do you think at trial the state will bring up the fact that BK had access to a gun but didn't use it in the murders?

No. Just had a regular assortment of weapons.

 

[RANCH]

No. Just had a regular assortment of weapons.

I agree. I don't see it being something that would help the state in it's case.

The jury may wonder why BK used a knife to kill multiple people when he had access to a gun. JMO.

 

[schooling]

I agree. I don't see it being something that would help the state in it's case.

The jury may wonder why BK used a knife to kill multiple people when he had access to a gun. JMO.

BK turned off his phone. Dressed in all black. Mask. And took other actions to go unidentified and cover his tracks. So it’s only logical he wouldn’t use a loud gun at 4am.

That seems like a reasonable conclusion that most jurors can and will come to.

And if KG’s Dad is correct about the autopsy report. Why he used a knife will become super clear during the trial. Pure, unadulterated rage. Taken out on 4 defenseless souls.

MOO

Edit: also worth mentioning that WA has no reciprocity with PA when it comes to a license to carry. We don’t know if BK applied for a license while in WA. I suspect we would have heard about it. Also, no evidence of a gun was found at his apartment. No, I don’t think a quadruple murderer cares about local WA gun laws but all indicators point to his gun not making the cross country trip with him. That’s a few more reasons why ‘no gun’

 

[Boxer]

I agree. I don't see it being something that would help the state in it's case.

The jury may wonder why BK used a knife to kill multiple people when he had access to a gun. JMO.

Ranger mode.

 

[Ursamajr]

His DNA on the sheath is evidence. His DNA is not on a notebook or a fast food bag or some random item, it's on the sheath of a fighting knife.

I'm with you but couldn't defense use this in their favor as well? "If BK had been the one to commit these murders, surely his DNA would be on something else, anything else?"

 

[jepop]

The Douglas Garland trial was local and I knew one of the victims professionally so I watched it very closely. Like this, there was a bloody crime scene but no bodies and LE found no DNA other than victims and their family at the house.

One of the things I found interesting was that since the evidence very circumstantial, the prosecution had investigators walk through the process of the early investigation, early potential suspects and the processes they used to eliminate them.

I feel it had a strong impact on the jury to know how much effort went into conducting a very comprehensive investigation and following the trail of evidence rather than making it seem like the evidence was made to fit a specific suspect. Perhaps the prosecution will take a similar approach.

Agree totally. Will be a major strategy used by the prosecution Imo. Will be effective in countering a defense via poking holes. Moo