4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #96

[jepop]

Judge's long order re IGG info from Jan this year. A good read and very good summary of what went down re IGG in this case.

Just in regard to the SNP profile page 8 ETA think judge is referring to State response titled "In support of Motion for Protective Order". Not sure what the date is on that one but recall it from Idaho Court Cases of Interest page.

"The state has represented that it has already disclosed the suspect SNP profile to the defense. Reply in Supp of Mot for Protective Order at 2"

 

[al66pine]

dbm

 

[Nila Aella]

Also in the article, this comment by an Idaho defense attorney on the change of venue decision -

One thing that came as a surprise to Neal and Meickle is the fact that Judge John Judge, the justice who has overseen this case, mentioned there might be a different judge at trial. "Usually, the District Judge will stay with that case," Meickle says, "But he left open the idea. He didn't say he would keep it so it's up to the Supreme Court the make that decision."

IMO he didn't leave it open.

@SpiderFalcon linked the pertinent criminal rule (TY )

Idaho Criminal Rule 21. Transfer for Trial
A motion for transfer may be made at or before arraignment or at any other time the court or these rules prescribe.

(a) For Prejudice. On motion of either party, the court must transfer the proceeding to another county if the court is satisfied that a fair and impartial trial cannot be had in the county where the case is pending.

(b) For Convenience. On motion of the defendant, the court may transfer the proceeding to another county, for the convenience of parties and witnesses, and in the interest of justice.

(c) Proceedings on Transfer.


(1) Transfer Within a Judicial District. If the proceeding is transferred to a court of proper venue within the same judicial district, the judge granting the transfer must:

(A) order the case transferred to a specific court of proper venue within the judicial district; and

(B) continue the assignment over the case, unless the administrative district judge reassigns the case to another judge of the judicial district.

(2) Transfer to a Different Judicial District. If the proceeding is transferred to a court of proper venue in a different judicial district, a new presiding judge is assigned as follows:

(A) If the original judge desires to continue the assignment over the case, the judge may so indicate in the order, suggesting a court of proper venue, and refer to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to a court of proper venue and for assignment of a specific judge to preside; or

(B) if the original judge does not desire to continue the assignment over the case, the judge must enter an order transferring the case without specifying the new place of venue, and then refer the case to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to a court of proper venue in another judicial district and assignment of a specific judge to preside in the criminal proceeding.

From the COV order:
VI. CONCLUSION AND ORDER Kohberger's Motion to Change Venue is granted pursuant to Idaho Criminal Rule 21(a) and 21(b). Consistent with the language of Idaho Criminal Rule 21(c)(2)(B),

21(a) Prejudice
21(b) Convenience

21(c)(2) Transfer to a different district
21(c)(2)(B) Original Judge does not desire to continue
JMO

 

[jepop]

IMO
2 cents

The main point is that the prosecution has not turned over the work from either lab on the how they came to the conclusion that it is BK's DNA.

For some reason the prosecution doesn't want the defense looking closely at any piece of the IGG process. Maybe because aspects of that are subjective and open to attack by the defense -- and if they look at how the SNP profile was developed, that opens the door to looking at what they (and the FBI, apparently) did with that profile.

Which, if you listen to the prosecution, doesn't matter, because they ended up comparing STR profiles in the end anyway. But it could maybe reveal clues that the FBI had blinders on in their investigation, in general. Or indirectly/accidentally reveal more about the original STR profile development that puts that in doubt.

5.37 octillion <——This number cannot be obtained by the CODIS 20 Loci DNA STR Analytical (the test they are supposed to feed CODIS with). It has an outer limit of 9.35 x 10-24 (septillions) for the whole of humanity and 7.32 x 10-23 for generic white males like him. What they’ve pinned to him is a result that has never been obtained from that test and never will be.

All MOO

Yeah, you posted suggesting Barlow was talking about the sheathe DNA on page 13 of the affidavit you linked. The point I was making is that is incorrect.

 

[wendy44]

Link to the Court Document

All MOO


I believe he's referring to on page 15 it says that the profile is ambiguous and partial. If this was a partial DNA profile from the knife sheath…. Then how did they match it to his DNA thru his dads DNA? How did the grand jury move forward with an indictment with a partial profile? This is what the defense wants to know. The defense wants the prosecution to show the labs work from what I understand.

Snipped by me--I don't think this is accurate. @Balthazar agrees the defense has not contested the actual match of the dna on the sheath to BK's dna. To my knowledge, the defense has never said the dna on the sheath is not BK's. It's his. There are no known issues with the retrieval, processing, matching, etc. of the dna on the sheath. The defense has likely done their own testing and if it didn't match, we'd surely know. To keep saying there's a problem with the match is inaccurate.

The filing you're citing is in regards to the Investigative Genetic Genealogy, the IGG. The defense is not really disputing any scientific process. They want to see the paperwork done by the FBI (and it's the FBI who had not turned over what the defense was asking for, not the prosecution) and the FBI was resisting, saying it wasn't material to the preparation of the defense and not subject to discovery.

The defense spends a lot of time in this motion arguing that they want to see the work product because it could be wrong. They argue that the IGG could produce a pool of suspects rather than just one and they want access to the tree created by the FBI. This argument is kind of disingenuous though. The IGG is easily replicated. There's no scientific process involved once you have the dna profile (which the defense doesn't dispute). They admit they've done their own IGG and created their own family tree. They already have the pool of suspects the FBI has and could (and likely have) investigated them on their own. In the cases they cite, the pool of suspects were tested and ultimately matches were found. For example, in the Angie Dodge case, they initially narrowed it down to one suspect, he was tested, and didn't match. It was a tip that didn't pan out. They went back to the tree and looked for other suspects to test. This is why the FBI calls this an investigative technique--IGG generates tips, places to look, but ultimately the match must be made.

If the IGG in this case was "wrong"--if it was done incorrectly, if there wasn't enough to provide matches, if the matches really point to someone else--the dna on the sheath would not match BK. And the defense doesn't dispute that it's a match. The IGG was right. So why were they fighting it so hard? The real reason is in this portion of the filing you cited:

"In addition, there has been a history of misuse of these IGG databases by law enforcement. Abuses by law enforcement of the GEDMatch resulted in users opting out of the use of their DNA data by law enforcement. The abuses and protests by users led GEDMatch to change their database so that users had to opt in for law enforcement use."

The defense wanted to see the work product of the FBI because they wanted to see if they violated any terms of service of these public databases when generating the matches and creating the family tree. This was their only hope of somehow getting the dna thrown out. Because it's his and they know it.
IMO