4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #88

[m00c0w]

OK, thanks for your reply. Do you possibly have a link that there was no other unknown DNA on the sheath? ( not trying to give you a hard time, I have just not seen that clarified in MSM) I am genuinely curious! IMO.

The probable cause affidavit plainly states there was a single source of male DNA from the sheath. The defense's motion for protective order does not contest this, and states there were two other sources of male DNA, but within the house. Now, we could speculate and theorize that there was actually more DNA on the sheath and the police are covering it all up, omitting this in their affidavits, and also hiding discovery, and the defense is also sort of complicit... but that goes down some rabbit holes that I'm not sure warrant traveling.

JMO

 

[jepop]

Not sure where this idea is coming from that there might be other unknown/unidentified dna on the knife sheath all of a sudden. ISL lab found and extracted a single source male dna sample from the snap button. We can assume the sheath was swabbed I think and that was the only unknowm/unidentified sample found. Ofcourse, victim's blood would be on the sheath, and hence their dna. But that's immaterial in context.Moo

Don't people think we would have heard through defense motions if other unidentified/unknown dna had been found on the sheath? Instead we are reading about two unknown samples found in the house (out of who knows how many painstakingly identified samples) and one from outside, all three of which didn't even qualify for CODIS.Why would defense waste time with those if investigators had been so incompetent as to ignore another/other unidentified dna sample/s from the sheath? The obvious answer is that investigators did not. Ofcourse people are free to speculate otherwise,but if so then Imo they are assuming a level of LE incompetence or conspiratorial cover-up that has no basis in fact or reality.Moo

 

[IDK]

The probable cause affidavit plainly states there was a single source of male DNA from the sheath. The defense's motion for protective order does not contest this, and states there were two other sources of male DNA, but within the house. Now, we could speculate and theorize that there was actually more DNA on the sheath and the police are covering it all up, omitting this in their affidavits, and also hiding discovery, and the defense is also sort of complicit... but that goes down some rabbit holes that I'm not sure warrant traveling.

JMO

Thank you for your reply— I appreciate it! Agree that if the defense team are concerned about this, they will be following up. IMO.

 

[iamshadow21]

Exactly, they could have only had access to a few video images of the car at first that perhaps weren't the best quality. After collecting further video from different sources and different grades of quality, it would have been easier to narrow the models down.

It's not like the LE said they were looking for a person driving a yellow school bus, these cars and years models are very, very similar. Another stretch by the Defense (arms now 15 feet long imo).

MOO

This. I said something almost identical a couple of months ago.

4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #84

What I meant was, they got Dad's DNA, ran it and used genealogy to see if it was a familial match to the knife sheath. If that makes sense. JMO The "genealogy" part usually comes into play when they have a genetic sample without a match in CODIS and no suspects. It would have been done early on...

www.websleuths.com

MOO

 

[schooling]

Not sure where this idea is coming from that there might be other unknown/unidentified dna on the knife sheath all of a sudden. ISL lab found and extracted a single source male dna sample from the snap button. We can assume the sheath was swabbed I think and that was the only unknowm/unidentified sample found. Ofcourse, victim's blood would be on the sheath, and hence their dna. But that's immaterial in context.Moo

Don't people think we would have heard through defense motions if other unidentified/unknown dna had been found on the sheath? Instead we are reading about two unknown samples found in the house (out of who knows how many painstakingly identified samples) and one from outside, all three of which didn't even qualify for CODIS.Why would defense waste time with those if investigators had been so incompetent as to ignore another/other unidentified dna sample/s from the sheath? The obvious answer is that investigators did not. Ofcourse people are free to speculate otherwise,but if so then Imo they are assuming a level of LE incompetence or conspiratorial cover-up that has no basis in fact or reality.Moo

We are living in upside down evidence world.

Didn't the defense specifically call out the DNA on the glove outside? So one would have to think they also know the location of the other two samples and just don't want to share it for one reason or another...

I can probably guess why...

I'm going to take a wild guess and assume if the unknown DNA(s) were found on a victim's body, near a victim's body, within the vicinity of a victim's body....we would know about it by now through some sort of filing....yet we don't! Instead we get one location leaked...the ever so ominous glove outside, OJ style.

 

[girlhasnoname]

This. I said something almost identical a couple of months ago.

4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #84

What I meant was, they got Dad's DNA, ran it and used genealogy to see if it was a familial match to the knife sheath. If that makes sense. JMO The "genealogy" part usually comes into play when they have a genetic sample without a match in CODIS and no suspects. It would have been done early on...

www.websleuths.com

MOO

HAHAHAHA, okay you beat me with Orange Hummer with party lights.

 

[iamshadow21]

HAHAHAHA, okay you beat me with Orange Hummer with party lights.

We both went for big, long, and the yellow/orange spectrum, though. Happy to be twinsies with you for today.

 

[schooling]

I wondered if it was an editing error of some kind. I still don't remember seeing a Sentra mentioned in any official documents or by any LE to the public.

There wasn't. It hasn't appeared in any court filing either. That was my mistake.

The Sentra came out of the Times article. And separately, I believe the defense cited that LE had identified another car (without specifying make/model/year) at a totally different time early in the investigation. So I connected the dots assuming the Times' reporting is correct.

I just want to say again, that I am not putting forward or defending this position. This is just what they are saying. What I think about BK is pretty well established by now (those creepy eyes say it all, yikes).

 

[NextSprint]

Not sure where this idea is coming from that there might be other unknown/unidentified dna on the knife sheath all of a sudden. ISL lab found and extracted a single source male dna sample from the snap button. We can assume the sheath was swabbed I think and that was the only unknowm/unidentified sample found. Ofcourse, victim's blood would be on the sheath, and hence their dna. But that's immaterial in context.Moo

Don't people think we would have heard through defense motions if other unidentified/unknown dna had been found on the sheath? Instead we are reading about two unknown samples found in the house (out of who knows how many painstakingly identified samples) and one from outside, all three of which didn't even qualify for CODIS.Why would defense waste time with those if investigators had been so incompetent as to ignore another/other unidentified dna sample/s from the sheath? The obvious answer is that investigators did not. Ofcourse people are free to speculate otherwise,but if so then Imo they are assuming a level of LE incompetence or conspiratorial cover-up that has no basis in fact or reality.Moo

<modsnip>

Because of the high levels of censorship (gags) around this case we aren't party to a few key bits of information that would lead to an informed view either way, I believe. But hopefully that will change quickly, whatever the outcome.

 

[scapa]

That $200/hour for a 40 hour workweek will go directly to Kootenai County, which is AT’s (& JL’s) employer.

As a State of Idaho, Latah County, and City of Moscow taxpayer, I totally get the desire to follow the money, but a sensational & simple X to Y in the articles does not work in this situation, MOO, when looking at public defenders who are also public servants employed by a government entity.

If anyone is interested in better understanding the public defense reforms Idaho is in the middle of, a search engine can be very helpful. Tucker v State of Idaho might be a good starting place & then follow the state legislation that has followed.

IANAL & MOO

ETA: a missing “who” in paragraph 2

Good catch. What could a top-tier private firm charge for defending this case for a client who could afford it? This is a very public and complex case with multiple victims and a potentially tricky defendant. I don't expect AT will have many opportunities to put her feet up, and suspect that some of the outrage likely comes from the apparently obvious guilt of BK to some.

(OT, but is there a recent high-profile case in which "former FBI agent J Coffindaffer" does not offer a quotable opinion?)

 

[girlhasnoname]

It's not that prosecutors aren't sometimes incompetent or omit things to get an indictment... it's that in order to believe this narrative, one also has to believe that the defense isn't interested in fully pursuing that narrative. In the motion for protective order, the defense never claimed there was more than one source of male DNA on the knife sheath. They never even implied it. As someone else here pointed out, they specifically name a glove in the yard but vaguely refer to two other sources of male DNA being present somewhere in the house. I find it hard to believe that the defense would believe there was an additional suspect's DNA on the sheath, but would fail to address this in the most substantive motion from them regarding the DNA evidence.

The conspiracy moves from incompetent or unseemly prosecutor to willfully malicious prosecutor, investigators, and a colluding defense, in addition to ignoring literally every other piece of circumstantial evidence that puts BK at the scene or very near the scene. As I said upthread, we're nearing Scott Peterson levels of worst-luck-on-earth here, or a completely massive far-reaching conspiracy to railroad BK for reasons yet to be determined.

JMO

^^This x 1000

 

[NextSprint]

It's not that prosecutors aren't sometimes incompetent or omit things to get an indictment... it's that in order to believe this narrative, one also has to believe that the defense isn't interested in fully pursuing that narrative. In the motion for protective order, the defense never claimed there was more than one source of male DNA on the knife sheath. They never even implied it. As someone else here pointed out, they specifically name a glove in the yard but vaguely refer to two other sources of male DNA being present somewhere in the house. I find it hard to believe that the defense would believe there was an additional suspect's DNA on the sheath, but would fail to address this in the most substantive motion from them regarding the DNA evidence.

The conspiracy moves from incompetent or unseemly prosecutor to willfully malicious prosecutor, investigators, and a colluding defense, in addition to ignoring literally every other piece of circumstantial evidence that puts BK at the scene or very near the scene. As I said upthread, we're nearing Scott Peterson levels of worst-luck-on-earth here, or a completely massive far-reaching conspiracy to railroad BK for reasons yet to be determined.

JMO

There's a hell of a lot of gagging around this case, not like much I've seen in recent years. I think there are probably some legitimate concerns around protecting some witnesses, and then some unnecessary gagging (part of which was correct when Judge Judge took over). What I'm trying to say is there could be things we don't know for good reason, combined with the general slowness of these processes, that has led you to that quite logical conclusion (about defence being in quasi-collusion if there is something really terrible afoot).

The one thing I can remember in this case that makes me stop and wonder that there might actually be something is when AT requested an ex parte hearing about three weeks ago. Meaning they had something to say to the judge that they didn't want the state to hear, not sure if it ever happened or what they might have said.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/080223-Objection-States-Motion-to-Compel-Motive-of-Defense-of-Alibi-Alternatively-to-Bar-Certain.pdf

 

[girlhasnoname]

Good catch. What could a top-tier private firm charge for defending this case for a client who could afford it? This is a very public and complex case with multiple victims and a potentially tricky defendant. I don't expect AT will have many opportunities to put her feet up, and suspect that some of the outrage likely comes from the apparently obvious guilt of BK to some.

(OT, but is there a recent high-profile case in which "former FBI agent J Coffindaffer" does not offer a quotable opinion?)

I'd say an easy 6-7 figure defense from a top-tier firm especially with a DP case.

MOO

 

[m00c0w]

There's a hell of a lot of gagging around this case, not like much I've seen in recent years. I think there are probably some legitimate concerns around protecting some witnesses, and then some unnecessary gagging (part of which was correct when Judge Judge took over). What I'm trying to say is there could be things we don't know for good reason, combined with the general slowness of these processes, that has led you to that quite logical conclusion (about defence being in quasi-collusion if there is something really terrible afoot).

The one thing I can remember in this case that makes me stop and wonder that there might actually be something is when AT requested an ex parte hearing about three weeks ago. Meaning they had something to say to the judge that they didn't want the state to hear, not sure if it ever happened or what they might have said.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/080223-Objection-States-Motion-to-Compel-Motive-of-Defense-of-Alibi-Alternatively-to-Bar-Certain.pdf

I could believe that a gag order was the reason the defense has not mentioned DNA on the sheath, except for the entire motion for a protective order that focused solely on DNA evidence and IGG. It makes zero sense that if they believed there was exculpatory DNA on the sheath they would not say it outright in the motion. They would just attempt to have the motion sealed, not tailor what's in the motion to avoid mentioning the largest piece of exculpatory evidence they could possibly have.

I think the defense is doing a great job at spinning up a lot of conjecture, but I also think they're straining at coming up with reasonable doubt that will actually help their client get an acquittal. I don't see the conspiracy theorism going over well in court with the jury.

JMO

 

[10ofRods]

Is it possible that the Nissan references all come to us by way of Defense motions and chatter? And that LE's work product included a search for a Nissan Sentra? Which you my untrained, uncarred mind looks virtually identical to the Hyundai Elantra. So LE was never looking for two cars, just one car mis-identified at first. And now the Defense is creating noise, implying that LE made BK's car and BK himself bend. I can't find a way that works in their favor but I think this is the petrol they're smelling.

IMO there member was a Nissan Sentra....

And the biggest clue, post sheath DNA, was the identification of a Hyundai Elantra in the WSU parking lot, from which BK was named, outed to LE. Of note, this driver-arounder apparently never called to LE to say he was driving about in response to LE's out call for the occupant(s) of such a vehicle to come forward. Heavens to murgatroyd, BK must've about driven over the murderer.... maybe that's how his DNA peanut butter got in the other guy's chocolate.

Guessing that's all there is to this. LE was looking for a Sentra until someone realized the Elantra is a doppel. They probably share a father back at the factory.

No evidence forced to fit a crime, no hidden discovery, no rush to judgment, no tunnel vision.

Just work product. The more they knew, the more they knew.

JMO

To me, it now looks like they said "Nissan" for 5 days, then (wrong year) Elantra for the remainder (after Nov 25 or thereabouts). I do wonder if Kohberger put the proper year on his paperwork for his parking permit at WSU (some people just guess, not having easy retrieval of car year).

I feel that once they had that Elantra from surveillance, they quickly zeroed in on Kohberger, over in Pullman and made sure the messaging in the pressers was geared to him - the one Elantra owner who wasn't coming forward. Maybe there were a couple not coming forward, but I bet most did come forward. Everyone was looking for it, so I am guessing WSU Campus Police got a few calls about Kohberger's and had him on their radar.

Since almost every police person has encountered "bad cops" who commit crimes (usually not murder, of course), when LE or LE-adjacent persons are on a list of suspects, I believe they get extra scrutiny.

IMO and IME.

 

[10ofRods]

I don't think this bit is correct is it?

The single source of BK's DNA was under the snap of the sheath.

I assume there was other DNA on the sheath, albeit if the perpetrator had rigorously cleansed the sheath or even doused it in something and only taken it out inside the room it was found, then the only other acquired DNA would be from the victims themselves, their bedding, and possibly at a reach, other people who had shared the room / bedding.

Do we actually know for sure how many different DNAs were located on the sheath though?

Yes. It's in the PCA.

Single source.

That means only ONE profile.

 

[10ofRods]

OK, thanks for your reply. Do you possibly have a link that there was no other unknown DNA on the sheath? ( not trying to give you a hard time, I have just not seen that clarified in MSM) I am genuinely curious! IMO.

You can find it on the MSM thread. And here is one of the many, many articles saying it's single source male:

Bryan Kohberger's DNA matches evidence found at Idaho murder scene: Court docs

DNA collected from Bryan Kohberger is a match for evidence found at the Moscow, Idaho, crime scene where four University of Idaho students were murdered.

abcnews.go.com

That's the first of thousands of results.

Single source, once again, means "only one profile found." Source of DNA is always a living organism, no other way to make DNA.

 

[girlhasnoname]

To me, it now looks like they said "Nissan" for 5 days, then (wrong year) Elantra for the remainder (after Nov 25 or thereabouts). I do wonder if Kohberger put the proper year on his paperwork for his parking permit at WSU (some people just guess, not having easy retrieval of car year).

I feel that once they had that Elantra from surveillance, they quickly zeroed in on Kohberger, over in Pullman and made sure the messaging in the pressers was geared to him - the one Elantra owner who wasn't coming forward. Maybe there were a couple not coming forward, but I bet most did come forward. Everyone was looking for it, so I am guessing WSU Campus Police got a few calls about Kohberger's and had him on their radar.

Since almost every police person has encountered "bad cops" who commit crimes (usually not murder, of course), when LE or LE-adjacent persons are on a list of suspects, I believe they get extra scrutiny.

IMO and IME.

I also think it might have been a LE tactic to purposely not correct the right year because they were afraid it might have spooked the offender (aka BK) to flee.

MOO

 

[Megnut]

I could believe that a gag order was the reason the defense has not mentioned DNA on the sheath, except for the entire motion for a protective order that focused solely on DNA evidence and IGG. It makes zero sense that if they believed there was exculpatory DNA on the sheath they would not say it outright in the motion. They would just attempt to have the motion sealed, not tailor what's in the motion to avoid mentioning the largest piece of exculpatory evidence they could possibly have.

I think the defense is doing a great job at spinning up a lot of conjecture, but I also think they're straining at coming up with reasonable doubt that will actually help their client get an acquittal. I don't see the conspiracy theorism going over well in court with the jury.

JMO

Yes. And I think it's evident in the dual approach -- whining about tunnel vision and rush to judgment, trying to get both sides of the same coin land up.

So which is it, Defense? Both is a hard sell.

When the emergent evidence continues to point in one direction while tangential branches prove unfruitful that's not pigeonholing.

It's solid police work.

JMO

 

[schooling]

Edited because I don't have a MSM source to cite, in my description of the origins of the insane Qanon like conspiracy theories emanating from this case.

I can say though the fraternity conspiracy (cited below) emanated from the chans and spread to facebook groups and youtube. Once the PCA was released and the fraternity theory was was proven to be flat out WRONG the same groups moved onto another anonymous source and the latest "BK WAS FRAMED!" theory

The eerie online world of the Idaho murders case

Even now Bryan Kohberger is in police custody, the online rumour mill shows no signs of winding down

www.independent.co.uk

Linking to more of the nonsense. The first few paragraphs should be of particular interest to anyone who's wondering where a lot of the leading seemingly innocuous questions come from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/crime-law/interactive/2023/idaho-student-killings-true-crime/