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

[CKS]

Apologies I did think that I read or heard from one of the court hearings it was on the sheath. I promise I'm not trying to spread misinformation whatsoever.

“To this date, the Defense is unaware of what sort of testing, if any, was conducted on these samples other than the STR DNA profiles,” according to the filing.

Link again to one of the articles from CNN

 

[GRT]

As far as I know, they never specified where the additional DNA from other unidentified males was found in the house. But I do remember reading that unidentified male DNA was found on a discarded glove found outside.

 

[GRT]

If an attorney states that their client is innocent in court and doesn't believe it, they are unethical. The statement must be based upon facts.

I think they said they "firmly believe" which is opinion and can be based on their feelings.

Who knows? Maybe they really do think BK is innocent. Or, maybe they think the State won't be able to prove him guilty in court.

People interpret "facts" differently, which is why we have some juries that find defendants we thought would be convicted to be not guilty. BARD comes into play, and I have always believed peer-pressure (within the jury) plays a role.

 

[PinkParis2052]

Correct. I'm searching for the hearing date from around June or July last year I think where BT explained that the two samples found in the house didn't qualify for CODIS. All that was gone through and clarified in that MTC hearing Imo. Will find a link and post or OP can research the hearing date at the Idaho Courts site BK cases of interest page. Jmo

That hearing was on Aug 18, 2023 and that's true what BT explained but the judge did ask Bill Thompson to reach out to the lab to be sure that the lab didn't over look anything.

 

[Chloegirl]

There was actually two unidentified male DNA's on the sheath and one unidentified male DNA on a glove found outside but LE for some reason didn't follow through and test those three for some strange reason.

This is not accurate. In the house yes NOT on the sheath. The glove, off property, being found by a private investigator could have been dropped by any passerby, although I did find it interesting. JMOO

And, the other DNA did not meet requirements for testing.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

IMO seems one often hears a defense attorney or other client advocate says words such as the following:

“I am convinced of my client’s innocence.”
“I do not believe my client is responsible for……..”
“We do not believe there is sufficient evidence that establishes my client’s guilt in this case.”
“We believe there is evidence demonstrating there is another perpetrator responsible for these crimes and that individual is not my client.”

They might even add the qualifying ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ in some statements.

Will be interesting to see how this starts to unfold in court. And with a supposed gag order IIUC in this case of BK, I am not sure all evidence (for either side) is yet fully known.

IMO IIUC it is one thing for a defense counsel to proclaim their client’s innocence in public records. And quite another to demonstrate it in a court of law or in a legal matter or record. I am looking forward to the case written record and filings in this case. MOO

 

[PinkParis2052]

As far as I know, they never specified where the additional DNA from other unidentified males was found in the house. But I do remember reading that unidentified male DNA was found on a discarded glove found outside.

This is not accurate. In the house yes NOT on the sheath. The glove, off property, being found by a private investigator could have been dropped by any passerby, although I did find it interesting. JMOO

And, the other DNA did not meet requirements for testing.

that glove was found on Nov 25, 2022 by a you-tuber that is a private investigator and the glove that was mentioned by the defense was found on Nov 20, 2022. It's two different gloves.


Source:
OBJECTION TO STATE’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

 

[jepop]

Bryan Kohberger's defense, state quarrel over DNA evidence

A llnk to the hearing where unknown samples from house were addressed can be found in above. Hearing was 18th August 2023.

Quote from article

"'DNA Evidence
...Anne Taylor, Kohberger's lawyer, specifically pointed to three unidentified male DNA samples taken from the murder scene that the defense has not received. Prosecutor Bill Thompson countered, arguing that the defense already possesses everything accessible to the state.
Thompson stated, "All I'm hearing is speculation that they wish there was something there. We can't respond to something that doesn't exist."
"Thompson concluded that the three samples in question were not uploaded to a Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) database due to ineligibility. He claimed that defense attorney Anne Taylor was informed of this by the lab"

 

[GRT]

Bryan Kohberger's defense, state quarrel over DNA evidence

A llnk to the hearing where unknown samples from house were addressed can be found in above. Hearing was 18th August 2023.

Quote from article

"'DNA Evidence
...Anne Taylor, Kohberger's lawyer, specifically pointed to three unidentified male DNA samples taken from the murder scene that the defense has not received. Prosecutor Bill Thompson countered, arguing that the defense already possesses everything accessible to the state.
Thompson stated, "All I'm hearing is speculation that they wish there was something there. We can't respond to something that doesn't exist."
"Thompson concluded that the three samples in question were not uploaded to a Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) database due to ineligibility. He claimed that defense attorney Anne Taylor was informed of this by the lab"

I wonder what that means--that the samples were not uploaded due to ineligibility? What would make them ineligible?

 

[jepop]

I wonder what that means--that the samples were not uploaded due to ineligibility? What would make them ineligible?

There was half a thread discussing all that back in Aug 2023. Postings of CODIS guidelines blah blah. Can't remember offhand but judge made no rulings about it so assume it got sorted. Jmo

 

[Cool Cats]

Yep, the jury is not going to buy a defense's argument that he happened to touch the sheath somewhere else... because why wasn't there anyone else's DNA on it? Single source... he was the ONLY ONE to touch the snap.

IMO, juries are generally down to earth and pragmatic and the DNA will mean a lot more when coupled with the other circumstantial evidence that it was him. JMO

If the defense says BK touched the snap in the store they have to have evidence of some sort and the prosecution then cross examines their witness and presents their own evidence as to why this did not happen.

Courts work on evidence, a defense attorney can say "maybe this maybe that" but that is not evidence the jury considers. The jury only considers the evidence. The jury doesn't deliberate on "maybe. " The judge tells them just to look at the evidence presented which includes witness testimony.

So this BK touching the sheath in a store is nonsense in my opinion.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Interestingly enough, the trial of Richard Allen for the murder of young Abby and Libby in Delphi, Indiana is staying local. The jurors are being selected from another and going through voir dire there, then will be transported and sequestered in Allen's home county.

And that's something at least. Kudos to the judge in that case for realizing that it's hogwash to get 16 objective jurors in the home county. However, I'm not a fan of jury sequestration unless absolutely 100% necessary so I'd rather see a trial moved than a jury sequestered.

MOO

 

[Balthazar]

I think they said they "firmly believe" which is opinion and can be based on their feelings.

Who knows? Maybe they really do think BK is innocent. Or, maybe they think the State won't be able to prove him guilty in court.

People interpret "facts" differently, which is why we have some juries that find defendants we thought would be convicted to be not guilty. BARD comes into play, and I have always believed peer-pressure (within the jury) plays a role.

EM said "firmly believe."

AT's exact quote speaking to JJJ during the hearing was:
"Your honor, Bryan is innocent."

There were no qualifiers and no word parsing in AT's statement.

 

[GRT]

EM said "firmly believe."

AT's exact quote speaking to JJJ during the hearing was:
"Your honor, Bryan is innocent."

There were no qualifiers and no word parsing in AT's statement.

Thank you for correcting that. Maybe they really believe he's innocent then.

 

[Megnut]

IIRC BK did not complete his Master's thesis but was granted his Master's anyway. Perhaps concessions were made due to the pandemic or maybe he had a compelling case for why he didn't have his data.

I think BK did a lot of sliding through life. Perhaps there were many people who "ironed his sheets" -- well-meaning people who try to smooth over the wrinkles for him rather than see him suffer because of them. Such thinking prevents natural failure which is often the best teacher; it also prevents tge growth that comes from moving through and or with discomfort. I suspect there is something about BK -- sort of a dark rumbling -- that those around him fear him, fear what he'll do if things don't go his way. Please, can you be his friend? Please accept his inadequate work. Well-meaning but only delaying IMO the inevitable.

I think BK tired of his thesis. Perhaps he felt those he did interview lacked the finesse he expected.

Had BK bottomed out of his Master's program, where would he have gone? What violence simmered?

Instead he received a promotion I don't know that he earned, only to find himself with PhD colleagues and a T.A. to coeds. That's a lot of peopling for someone who seems oriented to superiority, irritation, I justice.

I think BK decided to finish his Master's thesis. His way. Inside the mind of a real killer -- himself.

The concept of 'getting caught' is an effective detergent for most people. What if it wasn't a factor for BK? Or worse, what if there was a thrill to it? Knowing he'd get caught. Eventually. How far could he get before getting caught, the goal.

IMO he either left the sheath behind accidentally or intentionally. The DNA, ultra accidentally. IMO he took severe counter-measures to disrupt the exchange principle. Mask/balaclava, cap, coveralls, double gloves. I believe he doctored his vehicle. Possibly a stolen license plate, likely lining the interior, car and trunk both.

I think he thought his late model white sedan was about as generic a vehicle you could find. Made him feel invisible.

If BK is guilty of this crime, he's guilty even if he took the sheath with him. He was angling for the perfect crime, the first of many. I don't think he had a personal connection with his primary victim. (I believe he had one target and commit the other murders because those three stood in the way of his safe exit, DM too if he had seen her at her door.) I think his victim represented something to him. An archetype. A nemesis. Symbolic.

He'd still have been caught. Eye witness. CCTV. His car. His driver's license. His past.

The sheath merely sped up the process. And clinched it.

I think BK lives in his head. Takes advantages of advantages laid out before him, lies to himself and others when failure slaps him, and might have been afforded employment at or near colleges in one state or another where, when wrinkles interfered with his comfort, he'd strike again.

He was his own research subject.

Still is, IMO. He is center stage which is how he thinks of himself. Rather one-dimensional. Everyone exists only in relation to him. Until he decides otherwise.

BK's super power.

Ugly as hell.

JMO

 

[maskedwoman]

There was actually two unidentified male DNA's on the sheath and one unidentified male DNA on a glove found outside but LE for some reason didn't follow through and test those three for some strange reason.

Are you talking about the glove found outside at the edge of the street? If that's the one you're referring to, I believe it didn't qualify for DNA testing. There are rules for what you can submit for DNA testing. I know they were posted in a much earlier thread.

 

[Nila Aella]

I wonder what that means--that the samples were not uploaded due to ineligibility? What would make them ineligible?

BTs response during a hearing on the IGG said the CODIS test did not exist, that the samples (all three) were not run through codis for eligibility reasons. So it appears LE did a test for male/female, but did not run the samples through CODIS. MOO

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjck5nuw6yHAxWaMlkFHQ7PDiwQFnoECBAQAQ&url=https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/dna-fingerprint-act-of-2005-expungement-policy/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet&usg=AOvVaw0fFj6ASif4k6mujNtskXg8&opi=89978449

During one of the Motion to Compel hearings, AJ from the State mentioned that the State facilitated testing of additional trace evidence, as requested by the D.

3:12

JMO
edit: added hearing link

 

[Boxer]

BKs DNA taken on arrest matches the DNA at the crime scene.

 

[PinkParis2052]

BKs DNA taken on arrest matches the DNA at the crime scene.

Yeah and the defense in a filing wondered how the prosecution got to that number back in June 2023 filed by Anne Taylor in support of the third motion to compel

 

[PinkParis2052]

BTs response during a hearing on the IGG said the CODIS test did not exist, that the samples (all three) were not run through codis for eligibility reasons. So it appears LE did a test for male/female, but did not run the samples through CODIS. MOO

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjck5nuw6yHAxWaMlkFHQ7PDiwQFnoECBAQAQ&url=https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/dna-fingerprint-act-of-2005-expungement-policy/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet&usg=AOvVaw0fFj6ASif4k6mujNtskXg8&opi=89978449

During one of the Motion to Compel hearings, AJ from the State mentioned that the State facilitated testing of additional trace evidence, as requested by the D.

3:12

JMO
edit: added hearing link

Yeah I just heard about that, that was during the May 30, 2024 hearing, it was very surprising.