Would the Prosecution consider re-running DNA to settle the genetic gemology issue? I understood it to be settled before he was held so would they do it now to clarify?
Edit: I guess I mean now that BK has waived his speedy trial. Maybe in an effort to get the ball rolling again now that that issue is sort of settled if the defense thinks they were playing keep away?
It won't settle anything. So re-running the labwork is not the issue any longer.
No one is disputing the actual DNA labwork. The Prosecution did not run the DNA themselves, it was done at the Idaho State Police Lab. No one is claiming THEY did it wrong (especially as now there is a buccal swab and it matches Kohberger precisely, as it should).
The dispute is over a game of match. The letters from the sheath DNA results (all those ATCG's) gave a close relationship hit from a data base of millions of people who are contributing, voluntarily, their DNA to forensic work. To catch criminals. I'm about to upload mine to Othram, as well. Othram has its own forum here on WS and has been instrumental in solving many crimes.
What the Defense wants is something that was done by a non-thinking, non-notetaking computer. A giant spreadsheet, if you will. In which only a computer did the work and spat out the results. They want the "work product" of a computer.
Think of it like typing your name into a word document, then passing the document to someone else. Each person types in their name.
Then you use the search function to look for your own name. Should the FBI have taken a screen shot of this? Why? It always works the same way. No one takes screen shots of things like that. Instead, once the match was made, FBI had the percentage number of the match. A number that looks something like this:
23% identical to [Joe Kohberger]. (We know there was a match to a Kohberger, I made up the first name). For comparison, I have a 1% match with over 3000 people. I'm still related to them - but that wouldn't help much in a task like this one. What proof can I show that 1% is too low to be an effective match? None. Indeed, it could be a big lead in other circumstances. If my DNA was used, there would be one person (my daughter) who matches me 50% and two women (my half-sisters) who match me 23% and 25.2$ respectively (they also match my daughter at about 12-13%). Then there are about 1000 people who are my cousins (first, second, third and fourth - often 1-3x removed). If Kohberger were my cousin - he'd be in that smaller group. The fact that both names are Kohberger is helpful but it could have been a different last name.
IOW, all this stuff I just wrote - is it evidence? Is it work product? Or is it just common sense? I say it's just common sense. It's like asking some to "show their work" when 1+1 = 2
How does one show the work product for 1 + 1 ??? Would love to hear some answers - but I have never gotten any ones I can understand. People want to grab two items and show me and count - that's not "work product." That's common sense object lessons.
FBI did not build the database. FBI does not own the propietary decision-making 0's and 1's that run the database.
FBI did not find a Kohberger and tell them to submit DNA to Othram (or whatever service).
This was done voluntarily by whatever Kohberger submitted their DNA results. As far as we know, Othram never ran any results in a wet lab (they DO have the ability to do it - but their website says that's in really unusual circumstances; their main goal is IGG).
FBI did not tell the Othram-Kohberger to give their DNA to Othram, this was done voluntarily (and Othram is an entirely forensic - service, they make it VERY clear that the voluntary submission of one's results from a DNA test WILL be used to capture criminals - that's the whole point of this particular dBase, which I believe they used).
My problem with all of this is that apparently, the Defense wants the DNA results from the actual person (Joe Kohberger). Those are medical records. They were given to Othram for one purpose - not for sharing with the public. It's sad, but this tactic by the Defense will likely cause fewer people to upload their existing DNA results to IGG sites. I suppose that's the point. I'll continue my own campaign to get as many people as possible to get their results (somewhere) and then upload them to reputable IGG companies.
FBI put their stranger DNA ACTG report into a database that analyses ACTG's across millions of submissions and computes matches mathematically.
It's all just math. And very very simple math at that (not even college algebra needed). It's the sheer number of those letters (600,000 analyzed per submission x 1-2 million submissions) that means a computer must do it. A human would keep losing track and it would take years for them to get the results. Computer does it in a couple of seconds.
IMO.
innocenceproject.org
www.dailymail.co.uk
