MOO
According to court documents in regards to the DNA the comparison showed a statistical match specifically, the STR profile is at least 5.37 octillion times more likely to be seen if the defendant is the source than if an unrelated individual randomly selected from the general population is the source.
Part of the problem is the fact that the prosecution filed a motion to prevent the disclosure of the IGG information to the defense. The defense opposes the motion and filed a motion to compel requesting discovery of everything pertaining to the IGG investigation, including the family tree built by the FBI.
The prosecution expects the defense to just take their word that BK's DNA is a match but the defense wants to see how they came to this conclusion. For some reason the prosecution doesn't want to show their work which makes no sense whatsoever imo.
Two other problems with the touch DNA it was reported that Idaho lab did not initially obtain a viable DNA sample. DNA extraction and purification before PCR amplification by STANDARD methods like swabs and sticky tape being used for extraction before removal of contaminants (which could be something like bacteria which is also DNA) - causes an average loss of about 70% of the sample. I don't think Idaho lab even has a new micro vacuum process that's been invented.
This is a huge problem for low copy number touch DNA. Because Othram is not accredited, they employ a method of extraction called DIRECT extraction which also skips doing purification. It sounds like this method applies amplification methods directly to the object with surface DNA. DIRECT extraction is not permitted to be used by accredited labs, and is not legally permissible as evidence of a crime. Putting the development of an SNP profile for IGG done by Othram aside - did Idaho have Othram extract the STR sample they used for both CODIS and comparison to the Kohbergers?
The other problem is using a covertly obtained DNA sample from his father as a basis for arrest in order to obtain a buccal swab from him. Although it is not an actual law enacted by congress, both FBI and Federal forensic guidelines have strong wording against covertly obtaining and using DNA from a suspect's relative . It is a violation of the relative's rights against search and seizure without probable cause. His father was not a suspect. It is legal for them to collect trash searching for a suspect's DNA. Therefore when they were testing trash samples it was only permissible for them to to do straight match comparisons just like CODIS software does. It's either a 100% match or it's no match.
Any analysis beyond that is a violation against the person whom the DNA belonged to who was not a suspect under investigation. STR match is common for doing paternity tests between a male and his male offspring although it is preferable to have a sample from the mother of the child in order to make a 100% determination. I don't think you'll find any instance in which a low copy number touch DNA sample was used for a paternity test comparison, or any accredited lab that would be willing to do that even for purposes not involving a criminal case.
https://accounts.google.com/ServiceLogin?service=youtube&uilel=3&passive=true&continue=https://www.youtube.com/signin?action_handle_signin=true&app=desktop&hl=en&next=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DqmytVEHU3Uw&hl=en
Again for the record I'm not saying or do I think BK is innocent. I just don't think the prosecution's case is a slam dunk from what we know. The only evidence that we have that BK has anything to do with the crime is the touch DNA and that evidence is highly questionable in itself when you break it down.
All MOO