4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #95

[Cool Cats]

But isn't the DNA - touch dna or trace dna?

Same thing.

You touch an object and leave skin cells rather than extracting DNA a differnt way like through blood or saliva.

DNA on the sheath is a connection, MOO so the prosecution is just not answering ATs standard media bite geared arguments.

Yes!!!!

THAT is a huge connection

 

[PinkParis2052]

Same thing.

You touch an object and leave skin cells rather than extracting DNA a differnt way like through blood or saliva.


Yes!!!!

THAT is a huge connection

true but I've heard that touch dna can be transferable.

 

[katydid23]

I went through various photos online of servers at The Mad Greek. I was not able to locate an employee photo with a name tag of any kind. IMO, BK could not have located the address of any of the residents of 1122 King Rd without at least knowing a first and last name, but I’m unconvinced he had that opportunity.

Still waiting to hear from BT, what if any, victim was known to BK prior to 11/13/22.

You don't need a name tag to figure out a server's name, especially a college student working in a college town. If he sat back quietly and listened, there would be many opportunities to hear someone say her name---co-worker or otherwise.

He could have asked her what her name was . Or asked someone else.[hands money to cashier] " I want to leave this tip for my server---I don't remember her name---The petite one with blonde ponytail ?"--- Oh yeah, do you mean Maddie?

 

[katydid23]

true but I've heard that touch dna can be transferable.

Single Source male DNA found on the snap of the knife sheath was very unlikely to have been 'transferred' there.IMO

If the person using the snap had just touched BK and had his skin cells on his fingers, when he opened the sheath, where was his DNA?

Normally there'd be a mix of both DNAs if it was transferred by 3rd party.

 

[Boxer]

true but I've heard that touch dna can be transferable.

Not into a crevice of a snap. This is DNA left from handling the sheath.

 

[schooling]

which also explains why the defense able to make the claim that there is no connection between the victims and their client which the prosecution has never pushed back on this claim still to this day, in either in court hearings or in court documents.

I think that it’s possible that Prosecutors think they have evidence of a connection and the defense simply disagrees. As those connections would need to be proven in court.

So IMO, simply “that’s not BKs car outside Mad Greeks, the video is grainy” or “that’s not BKs email account, someone else used his IP” or “that’s not BKs social media account, the username doesn’t match up” could mean “no connections”.

There are examples of suspects practically caught red handed (IMO) and their defense attorneys still insist that they didn’t commit the act.

 

[schooling]

I agree with this and IMO, I think that the prosecution would have offered a plea deal to the suspect if the weapon used was located.

Edited by me for focus

Wouldn’t it be the opposite? If they found the knife on his person a plea deal would be less likely. IMO.

Or at least IMO I’ve never thought about plea deals in that way (solely in the hands of the defendant). I’ve always seen them as a way to either be somewhat lenient on a person deserving of said leniency or for prosecutors to hedge on cases that they don’t think are strong enough.

I don’t think they’d give BK a plea deal even if he wanted one. This case is beyond rock solid and would have been a death penalty case regardless of BKs wishes. IMO

To quote a famous fictitious detective

“when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?”

BKs problem is that once we eliminate the impossible what we are left with isn’t improbable at all. It’s the obvious.

MOO

 

[whiterhino]

Not into a crevice of a snap. This is DNA left from handling the sheath.

Single source epithelial cells on the use point (of a leather good).

It's sort of like a disposable razor. An item that afawk only one person has used and now the razor contains their DNA. The only way to place someone elses' DNA on it would be to shave them without their knowledge somehow (whilst possibly wearing a glove OR that person knew their DNA would be impossible to detect if the "razor" were tested).

The only thing I can say about the possibility of someone other than BK would be that epithelial cells are likely easier to "leave behind" as opposed to body fluids as those would need to be "fresh" in order to be effective. JMO. Also, as some of us have learned, it is difficult to test leather fwiw!

 

[PinkParis2052]

Edited by me for focus

Wouldn’t it be the opposite? If they found the knife on his person a plea deal would be less likely. IMO.

Or at least IMO I’ve never thought about plea deals in that way (solely in the hands of the defendant). I’ve always seen them as a way to either be somewhat lenient on a person deserving of said leniency or for prosecutors to hedge on cases that they don’t think are strong enough.

I don’t think they’d give BK a plea deal even if he wanted one. This case is beyond rock solid and would have been a death penalty case regardless of BKs wishes. IMO

To quote a famous fictitious detective

“when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?”

BKs problem is that once we eliminate the impossible what we are left with isn’t improbable at all. It’s the obvious.

MOO

what does MOO mean? Thank you

 

[PinkParis2052]

Not into a crevice of a snap. This is DNA left from handling the sheath.

where was it reported that it was into the crevice of a snap? thank you

 

[Kemug]

what does MOO mean? Thank you

I believe it stands for "my opinion only".

 

[PinkParis2052]

Edited by me for focus

Wouldn’t it be the opposite? If they found the knife on his person a plea deal would be less likely. IMO.

Or at least IMO I’ve never thought about plea deals in that way (solely in the hands of the defendant). I’ve always seen them as a way to either be somewhat lenient on a person deserving of said leniency or for prosecutors to hedge on cases that they don’t think are strong enough.

I don’t think they’d give BK a plea deal even if he wanted one. This case is beyond rock solid and would have been a death penalty case regardless of BKs wishes. IMO

To quote a famous fictitious detective

“when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?”

BKs problem is that once we eliminate the impossible what we are left with isn’t improbable at all. It’s the obvious.

MOO

Sorry for the confusion.

I don't think that a plea is solely in the hands of the defendant, If the knife found could be connected to the crime, I would think that the prosecution would have already offered a plea deal to the defense. IMO. I heard a lawyer stated that she thought those talks may happened and this was last year sometime and this was even without the murder weapon being located. (maybe this lawyer is wrong, I don't know)

I only mentioned the plea deal because in an article that I saw about a Latah County prosecutor that left their position to move to outside and it was mentioned that a lot of their cases ended in plea deals or if they did go to trial they usually ended in guilty verdicts.

When I said if a plea deal offered to Bryan, I'm thinking life in prison without the possibility of parole and giving Bryan a plea deal would save Latah County a lot of money and also save the small town from having to figure out how to deal with the large increase of people in the area in terms of traffic and lodging which is why they want the trial to be held during the summer months. Also the businesses in the area of Moscow and the surrounding areas are not large enough to handle all the increase in demand during the trial.

 

[PinkParis2052]

Single Source male DNA found on the snap of the knife sheath was very unlikely to have been 'transferred' there.IMO

If the person using the snap had just touched BK and had his skin cells on his fingers, when he opened the sheath, where was his DNA?

Normally there'd be a mix of both DNAs if it was transferred by 3rd party.

I'll go research this some more. Thank you.

 

[Megnut]

A defendant always has the right to plead guilty before trial and, I suppose, at any point during a trial.

Generally a plea agreement is brokered, usually the Prosecution and the Defense getting something and giving up something in the process.

IMO the State doesn't have a reason to give up anything, they've got full confidence they can convict on full charges.

Therefore, there's nothing of value (for the State) for BK/the Defense to give.

Now, if it was a shaky case and the State needed, say, the murder weapon, or the name of (if something like this were the case) another, more involved perp, or where the bodies are (huge bargaining chip in cases with missing persons) but the State appears to have everything they need to secure a conviction without any help from BK and his side of the courtroom.

The only possible thing is the DP, whether it's on or off the table.

For whatever reason, however, I don't think AT signed on to negotiate a plea -- probably because IMO BK either isn't talking or said no (I suspect he has said a total of zero words about the crime to his attorneys. BK's rich conversations happen only in his head IMO.). She came to play ball, intent on making the State hit hard. She don't let them convict with ease.

She seems to be borrowing from the new defense manual -- play to the public. Because that's where the future jury sits.

It'll be a fiery trial, no doubt, but IMO the State has the goods.

When they lay it all out, end to end, at trial, BK will be staring at a home video, a reel of every terrible mistake he made that day.

JMO

 

[PinkParis2052]

A defendant always has the right to plead guilty before trial and, I suppose, at any point during a trial.

Generally a plea agreement is brokered, usually the Prosecution and the Defense getting something and giving up something in the process.

IMO the State doesn't have a reason to give up anything, they've got full confidence they can convict on full charges.

Therefore, there's nothing of value (for the State) for BK/the Defense to give.

Now, if it was a shaky case and the State needed, say, the murder weapon, or the name of (if something like this were the case) another, more involved perp, or where the bodies are (huge bargaining chip in cases with missing persons) but the State appears to have everything they need to secure a conviction without any help from BK and his side of the courtroom.

The only possible thing is the DP, whether it's on or off the table.

For whatever reason, however, I don't think AT signed on to negotiate a plea -- probably because IMO BK either isn't talking or said no (I suspect he has said a total of zero words about the crime to his attorneys. BK's rich conversations happen only in his head IMO.). She came to play ball, intent on making the State hit hard. She don't let them convict with ease.

She seems to be borrowing from the new defense manual -- play to the public. Because that's where the future jury sits.

It'll be a fiery trial, no doubt, but IMO the State has the goods.

When they lay it all out, end to end, at trial, BK will be staring at a home video, a reel of every terrible mistake he made that day.

JMO

oh okay I see, Thank you