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

[Cool Cats]

We are going to have to agree to disagree.

The purpose of my post was to point out that both out that both sides haven't been civil to each other in hearings. I didn't mentions the courts documents because there is only 24 hrs in a day and my life outside of the internet is pretty busy sometimes and I can't type as much as I would like. But for example when the defense said "placed" and which was probably used since it's touch dna and Bill Thompson said planted and the defense has never said planted.

During the hearing when they were talking about giving AT more time since her expert died and she already has a new expert and they are playing catch up right now. AT asked for April deadline and Bill Thompson said that if the trial starts in May 2025, that it will be cutting his own throat and that is YouTube channel ran by an attorney that has said that it was inappropriate and even the judge paused and looked at Bill Thompson like what in the word. This is all IMO.

YouTube channel run by an attorney? What matters to me is the judge's YouTube Channel that the professional court transcriptionist puts in the record. Judge JJ J had his own channel. So I will listen to see what is going on and it should be self explanatory. The judge looking at BT means nothing unless the judge puts it in the record. I cannot read the judge's mind. And transcripts alleviate this problem.

I do not care about some publicity hungry attorney unless the judge clarifies it into the transcript.

I would have to see the context for "planted evidence" and it was the defense that said the DNA exchanged several hands, not the prosecution. The prosecution was clear that a strict chain of command was followed and I have seen no defense Motions trying to exclude the DNA.

‘Planted Evidence?’: Bryan Kohberger’s potential defense revealed amid DNA battle​

Eileen Holliday and Angenette Levy July 23rd, 2023, 9:57 am

‘It has to be pretty planned out’​

The Law&Crime Network’s Angenette Levy spoke with DNA expert Kristen Slaper about the defense strategy.

“What’s important to remember is that first of all DNA on its own doesn’t mean anything until you have a standard to compare,” Slaper explained.

“The claim is DNA is planted. I think it’s important to remember that Brian Koberger was not known. Nobody knew who did this and I think that’s important because in order for something to be planted. It has to be pretty planned out.”

“To plant someone’s DNA you have to have their DNA first of all. You have to have an item that their DNA is on and know that only their DNA would be found on it.”
And, trials are all about the evidence presented to juries.

To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this.

Yes they took DNA samples from people who hung around the housemates, a variety of people including their classmates.

Police were investigating many various possible suspects. Many of them provided "DNA," Logsdon writes. "At least one had his DNA surreptitiously taken from discarded cigarette. Many also had their phones taken and downloaded."

Through the first two weeks of December, investigators put some of their focus on classmates of the victims; they also widened the search to examine a man in another state who had been known to send harassing messages to women but had visited Idaho only twice in his life. They looked at a woman previously charged with assaults in the region. They looked at a man once accused of wielding a knife. They looked at sex offenders. They looked at a white supremacist. Each turned out to be a dead end.
The DNA on the snap shows beyond a resonable doubt - 5.37 octillion times - that BK touched the snap. The snap DNA matches BK's cheek DNA.

If I touch you and get some of your skin cells on my finger then touch a snap, your skin cells and my skin cells would both be on the snap. The Idaho State Lab found that the skin cells that were transferred to the snap, called touch DNA, were single source DNA. There was no other DNA mixed in. Period.

There was no sign that anyone's skin cells were on that snap other than BK's skin cells, this is what single source means.

If BK left skin cells on a glass how would the killer transfer BK's skin cells from the glass to the snap?

If I wanted to "plant" a person's DNA at my homicide crime scene why would I decide to do it only on a tiny sheath snap? This is not reasonable. I would take a cup BK touched and leave it at the crime scene.

I believe the jury will find beyond a reasonable doubt that the most reasonable explaination for BK's skin cells to be on the knife sheath snap is because BK touched the snap himself.

And, trials are all about the evidence presented to juries.

To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this.

Yes they took DNA samples from people who hung around the housemates, a variety of people including their classmates.

Police were investigating many various possible suspects. Many of them provided "DNA," Logsdon writes. "At least one had his DNA surreptitiously taken from a discarded cigarette. Many also had their phones taken and downloaded."

Through the first two weeks of December, investigators put some of their focus on classmates of the victims; they also widened the search to examine a man in another state who had been known to send harassing messages to women but had visited Idaho only twice in his life. They looked at a woman previously charged with assaults in the region. They looked at a man once accused of wielding a knife. They looked at sex offenders. They looked at white supremacists. Each turned out to be a dead end.

The DNA on the snap shows beyond a resonable doubt - 5.37 octillion times - that BK touched the snap. The snap DNA matches BK's cheek DNA.

If I touch you and get some of your skin cells on my finger then touch a snap, your skin cells and my skin cells would both be on the snap. The Idaho State Lab found that the skin cells that were transferred to the snap were single source DNA.

There was no sign that anyone's skin cells were on that snap other than BK's skin cells, this is what single source means.

Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer (Published 2023)

After four students were stabbed to death in a house near a college campus, investigators scooped up data and forensic evidence, hoping for leads. A new DNA technique finally brought a breakthrough.

www.nytimes.com

If BK left skin cells on a glass how would the killer transfer BK's skin cells from the glass to the snap?

If I wanted to "plant" a person's DNA at my homicide crime scene why would I decide to do it only on a tiny sheath snap? This is not reasonable. I would take a cup BK touched and leave it at the crime scene.

I believe the jury will find beyond a reasonable doubt that the most reasonable explaination for BK's skin cells to be on the knife sheath snap is because BK touched the snap himself.

Bryan Kohberger Says DNA From 3 Men, Mystery Glove at Murder Scene

Kohberger and his lawyer filed this objection because they are seeking a detailed breakdown of how genetic genealogy was utilized to help the FBI initially identify Kohberger as a person of interest in the case.

www.insideedition.com

Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer (Published 2023)

After four students were stabbed to death in a house near a college campus, investigators scooped up data and forensic evidence, hoping for leads. A new DNA technique finally brought a breakthrough.

www.nytimes.com

2 Cents

 

[Kemug]

No matter what, there's no way for a 3-month jury trial to be convenient for jurors.
MOO

RSBM
No there isn't, and I don't see how anyone could expect it. I blame the criminals, no-one else.

 

[NCWatcher]

RSBM
No there isn't, and I don't see how anyone could expect it. I blame the criminals, no-one else.

Yes. I agree. But at the same time, it's important defendants not be assumed to be criminals at the start by jurors. Not sure how to balance it all out. The $10/day pay and the 67¢ per mile reimbursement for jury service don't do a lot to help!

I do appreciate the judge wanting to make the 3 months or so of service more palatable for jurors including jurors who have school-aged kids. I just don't think a May start date will do that.
MOO

 

[Rolypolyoly]

We are going to have to agree to disagree.

The purpose of my post was to point out that both out that both sides haven't been civil to each other in hearings. I didn't mentions the courts documents because there is only 24 hrs in a day and my life outside of the internet is pretty busy sometimes and I can't type as much as I would like. But for example when the defense said "placed" and which was probably used since it's touch dna and Bill Thompson said planted and the defense has never said planted.

During the hearing when they were talking about giving AT more time since her expert died and she already has a new expert and they are playing catch up right now. AT asked for April deadline and Bill Thompson said that if the trial starts in May 2025, that it will be cutting his own throat and that is YouTube channel ran by an attorney that has said that it was inappropriate and even the judge paused and looked at Bill Thompson like what in the word. This is all IMO.

I did flinch a bit when BT said that, it was an inappropriate thing to say given the circumstances but it came across to me as just a poor choice of words and in no way deliberate or theatrical in nature. Just my take on it though.

 

[Boxer]

We are going to have to agree to disagree.

The purpose of my post was to point out that both out that both sides haven't been civil to each other in hearings. I didn't mentions the courts documents because there is only 24 hrs in a day and my life outside of the internet is pretty busy sometimes and I can't type as much as I would like. But for example when the defense said "placed" and which was probably used since it's touch dna and Bill Thompson said planted and the defense has never said planted.

During the hearing when they were talking about giving AT more time since her expert died and she already has a new expert and they are playing catch up right now. AT asked for April deadline and Bill Thompson said that if the trial starts in May 2025, that it will be cutting his own throat and that is YouTube channel ran by an attorney that has said that it was inappropriate and even the judge paused and looked at Bill Thompson like what in the word. This is all IMO.

Saying someone "placed" false evidence at a murder scene is the contrived word, it crafted to minimize reaction, while getting it on record.

It is a huge accusation of the police, or a SODDi prep argument.
Nevertheless the most direct word for the act of "placing" false evidence is "planted."
BT just clarified her meaning so it did not slide by.

 

[Trebor5591]

Didn’t realize BK previous jail cell was located underneath the courtroom in Latah county.

BK handcuffed behind his back at hearing. Will that be the next motion? Asking that cuffs be removed during hearings/trial?

Anyone know if BK family have ever visited him?

moo

In my opinion, BK is an extremely dangerous man. To me, he has the aura of a snake. Young and strong, he could do some serious damage in court if he decided he wanted to. If I were the judge, I would require he stay cuffed and shackled during the entire trial. JMO

 

[PinkParis2052]

Saying someone "placed" false evidence at a murder scene is the contrived word, it crafted to minimize reaction, while getting it on record.

It is a huge accusation of the police, or a SODDi prep argument.
Nevertheless the most direct word for the act of "placing" false evidence is "planted."
BT just clarified her meaning so it did not slide by.

oh...mmm...very interesting.

 

[PinkParis2052]

YouTube channel run by an attorney? What matters to me is the judge's YouTube Channel that the professional court transcriptionist puts in the record. Judge JJ J had his own channel. So I will listen to see what is going on and it should be self explanatory. The judge looking at BT means nothing unless the judge puts it in the record. I cannot read the judge's mind. And transcripts alleviate this problem.

I do not care about some publicity hungry attorney unless the judge clarifies it into the transcript.

I would have to see the context for "planted evidence" and it was the defense that said the DNA exchanged several hands, not the prosecution. The prosecution was clear that a strict chain of command was followed and I have seen no defense Motions trying to exclude the DNA.

‘Planted Evidence?’: Bryan Kohberger’s potential defense revealed amid DNA battle​

Eileen Holliday and Angenette Levy July 23rd, 2023, 9:57 am

‘It has to be pretty planned out’​

The Law&Crime Network’s Angenette Levy spoke with DNA expert Kristen Slaper about the defense strategy.

“What’s important to remember is that first of all DNA on its own doesn’t mean anything until you have a standard to compare,” Slaper explained.

“The claim is DNA is planted. I think it’s important to remember that Brian Koberger was not known. Nobody knew who did this and I think that’s important because in order for something to be planted. It has to be pretty planned out.”

“To plant someone’s DNA you have to have their DNA first of all. You have to have an item that their DNA is on and know that only their DNA would be found on it.”
And, trials are all about the evidence presented to juries.

To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this.

Yes they took DNA samples from people who hung around the housemates, a variety of people including their classmates.

Police were investigating many various possible suspects. Many of them provided "DNA," Logsdon writes. "At least one had his DNA surreptitiously taken from discarded cigarette. Many also had their phones taken and downloaded."

Through the first two weeks of December, investigators put some of their focus on classmates of the victims; they also widened the search to examine a man in another state who had been known to send harassing messages to women but had visited Idaho only twice in his life. They looked at a woman previously charged with assaults in the region. They looked at a man once accused of wielding a knife. They looked at sex offenders. They looked at a white supremacist. Each turned out to be a dead end.
The DNA on the snap shows beyond a resonable doubt - 5.37 octillion times - that BK touched the snap. The snap DNA matches BK's cheek DNA.

If I touch you and get some of your skin cells on my finger then touch a snap, your skin cells and my skin cells would both be on the snap. The Idaho State Lab found that the skin cells that were transferred to the snap, called touch DNA, were single source DNA. There was no other DNA mixed in. Period.

There was no sign that anyone's skin cells were on that snap other than BK's skin cells, this is what single source means.

If BK left skin cells on a glass how would the killer transfer BK's skin cells from the glass to the snap?

If I wanted to "plant" a person's DNA at my homicide crime scene why would I decide to do it only on a tiny sheath snap? This is not reasonable. I would take a cup BK touched and leave it at the crime scene.

I believe the jury will find beyond a reasonable doubt that the most reasonable explaination for BK's skin cells to be on the knife sheath snap is because BK touched the snap himself.

And, trials are all about the evidence presented to juries.

To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this.

Yes they took DNA samples from people who hung around the housemates, a variety of people including their classmates.

Police were investigating many various possible suspects. Many of them provided "DNA," Logsdon writes. "At least one had his DNA surreptitiously taken from a discarded cigarette. Many also had their phones taken and downloaded."

Through the first two weeks of December, investigators put some of their focus on classmates of the victims; they also widened the search to examine a man in another state who had been known to send harassing messages to women but had visited Idaho only twice in his life. They looked at a woman previously charged with assaults in the region. They looked at a man once accused of wielding a knife. They looked at sex offenders. They looked at white supremacists. Each turned out to be a dead end.


The DNA on the snap shows beyond a resonable doubt - 5.37 octillion times - that BK touched the snap. The snap DNA matches BK's cheek DNA.

If I touch you and get some of your skin cells on my finger then touch a snap, your skin cells and my skin cells would both be on the snap. The Idaho State Lab found that the skin cells that were transferred to the snap were single source DNA.

There was no sign that anyone's skin cells were on that snap other than BK's skin cells, this is what single source means.

Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer (Published 2023)

After four students were stabbed to death in a house near a college campus, investigators scooped up data and forensic evidence, hoping for leads. A new DNA technique finally brought a breakthrough.

www.nytimes.com

If BK left skin cells on a glass how would the killer transfer BK's skin cells from the glass to the snap?

If I wanted to "plant" a person's DNA at my homicide crime scene why would I decide to do it only on a tiny sheath snap? This is not reasonable. I would take a cup BK touched and leave it at the crime scene.

I believe the jury will find beyond a reasonable doubt that the most reasonable explaination for BK's skin cells to be on the knife sheath snap is because BK touched the snap himself.

Bryan Kohberger Says DNA From 3 Men, Mystery Glove at Murder Scene

Kohberger and his lawyer filed this objection because they are seeking a detailed breakdown of how genetic genealogy was utilized to help the FBI initially identify Kohberger as a person of interest in the case.

www.insideedition.com

Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer (Published 2023)

After four students were stabbed to death in a house near a college campus, investigators scooped up data and forensic evidence, hoping for leads. A new DNA technique finally brought a breakthrough.

www.nytimes.com

2 Cents

No it wasn't a lawyer on YouTube and this lawyer referenced court documents.

From the court document from the defense filed on June 22, 2023 OBJECTION TO STATE’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER


From the prosecution's document - REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER filed on July 11, 2023
here's a screenshot it.

Yeah I have to look into that octillion times DNA situation and I'm still researching it.

 

[Megnut]

I fear this is all theatre to BK. Courtroom, center stage.

Just as he perceives the world (IMO), he's at the center and all the key players are gathered around. In some ways, this is his Master's thesis.

Getting caught eventually scored low on his prep card. While he took obvious steps to avoid getting caught quickly.

Tried to anyway. Pesky DNA. IF he intended to leave the sheath behind (as a signature -- look who's fighting now, Marines), he surely didn't mean to leave DNA behind.

Likewise, I don't think he planned to leave a bloodbath behind. Or step in it.

But now that he's caught, I think he's watching this play out. With the same odd detachment and internal fascination/irritation he's always had. Ironically, although he's locked up in a jail cell, I think he continues to feel very powerful. For he's fully aware of what he's capable of. And how easy it is to do it. I think no one in his past or in his orbit (whether in jail or in the courtroom) is safe from his mental exercises. I imagine he fancies himself a ninja. No one should relax in his presence.

Probably amoral, he has a moral code of his own making. IMO it's what gave him motive, motivated him enter that home and violate social norms with unfettered violence. Who does that? IMO he's the archetype. Beyond dangerous. Because he works at looking harmless.

JMO

 

[Megnut]

In my opinion, BK is an extremely dangerous man. To me, he has the aura of a snake. Young and strong, he could do some serious damage in court if he decided he wanted to. If I were the judge, I would require he stay cuffed and shackled during the entire trial. JMO

IMO there's 100% security he's wearing a stun belt. Watch his movements. He is making sure he didn't do anything fast.

He might not have shackles but IMO he's hot wired.

JMO

 

[NCWatcher]

In my opinion, BK is an extremely dangerous man. To me, he has the aura of a snake. Young and strong, he could do some serious damage in court if he decided he wanted to. If I were the judge, I would require he stay cuffed and shackled during the entire trial. JMO

BBM

If the judge was to allow much less order BK to be handcuffed or shackled within sight of the jurors, if a guilty verdict was rendered (no mistrial or hung jury) that verdict would very likely be overturned based on the 14th Amendment and BK's due process rights. Restraining a defendant when the verdict is read is not ok either. A Defendant Cannot be Handcuffed For The Reading Of the Verdict. - New York Appellate Lawyer

People likely have all kinds of opinions about the imminent danger posed by BK. But there's nothing to say he'd be disruptive during the trial. He's not been disruptive during any hearing, he's not attempted to escape or harm court personnel or members of the public during hearings, and at this point, he's considered innocent of the murder charges. The narrow exceptions allowing restraints during trial require the presiding judge to put on the record an "individualized" assessment showing why the danger posed requires restraints and overrides the defendant's due process rights. To do that a judge would need evidence BK would likely cause harm if not restrained, not just an opinion or a worry about what could happen. Despite the gag order restricting the flow of information, it's pretty clear no evidence of that sort exists.
MOO

 

[Boxer]

In my opinion, BK is an extremely dangerous man. To me, he has the aura of a snake. Young and strong, he could do some serious damage in court if he decided he wanted to. If I were the judge, I would require he stay cuffed and shackled during the entire trial. JMO

He sought to have, and achieved the body a warrior.

 

[Cool Cats]

We are going to have to agree to disagree.

The purpose of my post was to point out that both out that both sides haven't been civil to each other in hearings. I didn't mentions the courts documents because there is only 24 hrs in a day and my life outside of the internet is pretty busy sometimes and I can't type as much as I would like. But for example when the defense said "placed" and which was probably used since it's touch dna and Bill Thompson said planted and the defense has never said planted.

During the hearing when they were talking about giving AT more time since her expert died and she already has a new expert and they are playing catch up right now. AT asked for April deadline and Bill Thompson said that if the trial starts in May 2025, that it will be cutting his own throat and that is YouTube channel ran by an attorney that has said that it was inappropriate and even the judge paused and looked at Bill Thompson like what in the word. This is all IMO.

YouTube channel run by an attorney? What matters to me is the judge's YouTube Channel that the professional court transcriptionist puts in the record. Judge JJ J had his own channel. So I will listen to see what is going on and it should be self explanatory. The judge looking at BT means nothing unless the judge puts it in the record. I cannot read the judge's mind. And transcripts alleviate this problem.

I do not care about some publicity hungry attorney unless the judge clarifies it into the transcript.

I would have to see the context for "planted evidence" and it was the prosecution that said the DNA exchangedd hands, not the prosecution. The prosecution was ckear that tge cbain of command was followed and I have seen no defense Motiondps trying to exclude the DNA. Ludicrous going on 2 years now, how it appears to me.

‘Planted Evidence?’: Bryan Kohberger’s potential defense revealed amid DNA battle​

Eileen Holliday and Angenette Levy July 23rd, 2023, 9:57 am

‘It has to be pretty planned out’​

The Law&Crime Network’s Angenette Levy spoke with DNA expert Kristen Slaper about the defense strategy.

“What’s important to remember is that first of all DNA on its own doesn’t mean anything until you have a standard to compare,” Slaper explained.

“The claim is DNA is planted. I think it’s important to remember that Brian Koberger was not known. Nobody knew who did this and I think that’s important because in order for something to be planted. It has to be pretty planned out.”

“To plant someone’s DNA you have to have their DNA first of all. You have to have an item that their DNA is on and know that only their DNA would be found on it.”
And, trials are all about the evidence presented to juries.

To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this.

Yes they took DNA samples from people who hung around the housemates, a variety of people including their classmates.

Police were investigating many various possible suspects. Many of them provided DNA," Logsdon writes. "At least one had his DNA surreptitiously taken from discarded cigarette. Many also had their phones taken and downloaded."

Through the first two weeks of December, investigators put some of their focus on classmates of the victims; they also widened the search to examine a man in another state who had been known to send harassing messages to women but had visited Idaho only twice in his life. They looked at a woman previously charged with assaults in the region. They looked at a man once accused of wielding a knife. They looked at sex offenders. They looked at a white supremacist. Each turned out to be a dead end.
The DNA on the snap shows beyond a resonable doubt - 5.37 octillion times - that BK touched the snap. The snap DNA matches BK's cheek DNA.

If I touch you and get some of your skin cells on my finger then touch a snap, your skin cells and my skin cells would both be on the snap. The Idaho State Lab found that the skin cells that were transferred to the snap, called touch DNA, were single source DNA. There was no other DNA mixed in. Period.

There was no sign that anyone's skin cells were on that snap other than BK's skin cells, this is what single source means.

If BK left skin cells on a glass how would the killer transfer BK's skin cells from the glass to the snap?

If I wanted to "plant" a person's DNA at my homicide crime scene why would I decide to do it only on a tiny sheath snap? This is not reasonable. I would take a cup BK touched and leave it at the crime scene.

I believe the jury will find beyond a reasonable doubt that the most reasonable explaination for BK's skin cells to be on the knife sheath snap is because BK touched the snap himself.

And, trials are all about the evidence presented to juries.

To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this.

Yes they took DNA samples from people who hung around the housemates, a variety of people including their classmates. Also, Steve Goncalves said he made guys lift up their shirts to see if there were defensive scratch marks on them....not sure where he did this at but it had nothing to do with the actual LE investigation.

Police were investigating many various possible suspects. Many of them provided DNA," Logsdon writes. "At least one had his DNA surreptitiously taken from discarded cigarette. Many also had their phones taken and downloaded."

Through the first two weeks of December, investigators put some of their focus on classmates of the victims; they also widened the search to examine a man in another state who had been known to send harassing messages to women but had visited Idaho only twice in his life. They looked at a woman previously charged with assaults in the region. They looked at a man once accused of wielding a knife. They looked at sex offenders. They looked at a white supremacist. Each turned out to be a dead end.

The DNA on the snap shows beyond a resonable doubt - 5.37 octillion times - that BK touched the snap. The snap DNA matches BK's cheek DNA.

If I touch you and get some of your skin cells on my finger then touch a snap, your skin cells and my skin cells would both be on the snap. The Idaho State Lab found that the skin cells that were transferred to the snap were single source DNA.

There was no sign that anyone's skin cells were on that snap other than BK's skin cells, this is what single source means.

Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer (Published 2023)

After four students were stabbed to death in a house near a college campus, investigators scooped up data and forensic evidence, hoping for leads. A new DNA technique finally brought a breakthrough.

www.nytimes.com

If BK left skin cells on a glass how would the killer transfer BK's skin cells from the glass to the snap?

If I wanted to "plant" a person's DNA at my homicide crime scene why would I decide to do it only on a tiny sheath snap? This is not reasonable. I would take a cup BK touched and leave it at the crime scene.

I believe the jury will find beyond a reasonable doubt that the most reasonable explaination for BK's skin cells to be on the knife sheath snap is because BK touched the snap himself.

2 Cents

I'm pleasantly surprised because it could have gone the other way, but not surprised at the decision itself. I've felt for a very long time that it would be next to impossible to find a completely objective jury in Moscow/Latah County just based on human behavior and the response to community trauma.

MOO.

And multiple security and parking issues, traffic and logistics.

 

[Swansee]

I did flinch a bit when BT said that, it was an inappropriate thing to say given the circumstances but it came across to me as just a poor choice of words and in no way deliberate or theatrical in nature. Just my take on it though.

It was a really surprising choice of words, considering the crime at hand.
I'll admit that when I re-watched the hearing, I zoomed in on BK's face while Bill Thompson said that, to see if that phrase would elicit any reaction or expression on the face of the accused. But there was nothing to see there at all, his face remained completely blank as always.

 

[Justice101]

why does a neck beard matter? it doesn't matter to me--- just wondering

post deleted.

 

[maskedwoman]

Wow I didn't hear him say that...I guess I should watch the hearing again.

Personally I think everyone is sick and tired of the defense team's delays. It's always something with them. Constant whining gets old and that is all she has done.

She can't keep up with discovery...whines that is too much...has no time to even look at it then whines some more that they don't have everything.

This trial will be probably not even happen until 2026. But now that BK has a spartan cell and no TV maybe he will start whining.

I do hope he's happy he got his change of venue. He is now on our local news every night here in Boise. And he can't even watch it!

MOO of course.

I don't know how she can be sure what she does and doesn't have if she can't keep up with discovery and doesn't have time to look at it all. But maybe I'm too literal. It happens. LOL

 

[snooptroop88]

YouTube channel run by an attorney? What matters to me is the judge's YouTube Channel that the professional court transcriptionist puts in the record. Judge JJ J had his own channel. So I will listen to see what is going on and it should be self explanatory. The judge looking at BT means nothing unless the judge puts it in the record. I cannot read the judge's mind. And transcripts alleviate this problem.

I do not care about some publicity hungry attorney unless the judge clarifies it into the transcript.

I would have to see the context for "planted evidence" and it was the defense that said the DNA exchanged several hands, not the prosecution. The prosecution was clear that a strict chain of command was followed and I have seen no defense Motions trying to exclude the DNA.

‘Planted Evidence?’: Bryan Kohberger’s potential defense revealed amid DNA battle​

Eileen Holliday and Angenette Levy July 23rd, 2023, 9:57 am

‘It has to be pretty planned out’​

The Law&Crime Network’s Angenette Levy spoke with DNA expert Kristen Slaper about the defense strategy.

“What’s important to remember is that first of all DNA on its own doesn’t mean anything until you have a standard to compare,” Slaper explained.

“The claim is DNA is planted. I think it’s important to remember that Brian Koberger was not known. Nobody knew who did this and I think that’s important because in order for something to be planted. It has to be pretty planned out.”

“To plant someone’s DNA you have to have their DNA first of all. You have to have an item that their DNA is on and know that only their DNA would be found on it.”
And, trials are all about the evidence presented to juries.

To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this.

Yes they took DNA samples from people who hung around the housemates, a variety of people including their classmates.

Police were investigating many various possible suspects. Many of them provided "DNA," Logsdon writes. "At least one had his DNA surreptitiously taken from discarded cigarette. Many also had their phones taken and downloaded."

Through the first two weeks of December, investigators put some of their focus on classmates of the victims; they also widened the search to examine a man in another state who had been known to send harassing messages to women but had visited Idaho only twice in his life. They looked at a woman previously charged with assaults in the region. They looked at a man once accused of wielding a knife. They looked at sex offenders. They looked at a white supremacist. Each turned out to be a dead end.
The DNA on the snap shows beyond a resonable doubt - 5.37 octillion times - that BK touched the snap. The snap DNA matches BK's cheek DNA.

If I touch you and get some of your skin cells on my finger then touch a snap, your skin cells and my skin cells would both be on the snap. The Idaho State Lab found that the skin cells that were transferred to the snap, called touch DNA, were single source DNA. There was no other DNA mixed in. Period.

There was no sign that anyone's skin cells were on that snap other than BK's skin cells, this is what single source means.

If BK left skin cells on a glass how would the killer transfer BK's skin cells from the glass to the snap?

If I wanted to "plant" a person's DNA at my homicide crime scene why would I decide to do it only on a tiny sheath snap? This is not reasonable. I would take a cup BK touched and leave it at the crime scene.

I believe the jury will find beyond a reasonable doubt that the most reasonable explaination for BK's skin cells to be on the knife sheath snap is because BK touched the snap himself.

And, trials are all about the evidence presented to juries.

To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this.

Yes they took DNA samples from people who hung around the housemates, a variety of people including their classmates.

Police were investigating many various possible suspects. Many of them provided "DNA," Logsdon writes. "At least one had his DNA surreptitiously taken from a discarded cigarette. Many also had their phones taken and downloaded."

Through the first two weeks of December, investigators put some of their focus on classmates of the victims; they also widened the search to examine a man in another state who had been known to send harassing messages to women but had visited Idaho only twice in his life. They looked at a woman previously charged with assaults in the region. They looked at a man once accused of wielding a knife. They looked at sex offenders. They looked at white supremacists. Each turned out to be a dead end.


The DNA on the snap shows beyond a resonable doubt - 5.37 octillion times - that BK touched the snap. The snap DNA matches BK's cheek DNA.

If I touch you and get some of your skin cells on my finger then touch a snap, your skin cells and my skin cells would both be on the snap. The Idaho State Lab found that the skin cells that were transferred to the snap were single source DNA.

There was no sign that anyone's skin cells were on that snap other than BK's skin cells, this is what single source means.

Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer (Published 2023)

After four students were stabbed to death in a house near a college campus, investigators scooped up data and forensic evidence, hoping for leads. A new DNA technique finally brought a breakthrough.

www.nytimes.com

If BK left skin cells on a glass how would the killer transfer BK's skin cells from the glass to the snap?

If I wanted to "plant" a person's DNA at my homicide crime scene why would I decide to do it only on a tiny sheath snap? This is not reasonable. I would take a cup BK touched and leave it at the crime scene.

I believe the jury will find beyond a reasonable doubt that the most reasonable explaination for BK's skin cells to be on the knife sheath snap is because BK touched the snap himself.

Bryan Kohberger Says DNA From 3 Men, Mystery Glove at Murder Scene

Kohberger and his lawyer filed this objection because they are seeking a detailed breakdown of how genetic genealogy was utilized to help the FBI initially identify Kohberger as a person of interest in the case.

www.insideedition.com

Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer (Published 2023)

After four students were stabbed to death in a house near a college campus, investigators scooped up data and forensic evidence, hoping for leads. A new DNA technique finally brought a breakthrough.

www.nytimes.com

2 Cents

"To get up in front of a jury and say that maybe someone planted BK's DNA is not enough...the defense would have to show the jury evidence that actually supports this." Amen. The D pursuing this route shows me one thing: BK himself is largely driving the strategy. Who on earth would think BK was just so important that LE or anyone else actually goes to these incredible lengths to frame BK for a quadruple homicide?

BK of course. He'd like to believe it.

I hope everyone the D casts doubt on claims he or she was out gazing at the moon and the stars (from a closed park) when all of this intense "framing" activity was supposed to have been occurring.

(At which point the defense will claim the moon and stars are in on the plot.) ONLY BK could take the State of Idaho v Bryan Kohberger and try to twist it into Bryan Kohberger v the State of Idaho. ONLY BK.

 

[schooling]

View attachment 534281
Yeah I have to look into that octillion times DNA situation and I'm still researching it.

<Snipped for brevity>

1 in 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. It’s always useful to see the zeroes.

Only 117,000,000,000 humans are estimated to have ever lived on earth.

Does that help?

IMO A.T. might need funding for a Time Machine AND a Galactic Star Cruiser to help the defense team find the real killer.

 

[PinkParis2052]

<Snipped for brevity>

1 in 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. It’s always useful to see the zeroes.

Only 117,000,000,000 humans are estimated to have ever lived on earth.

Does that help?

IMO A.T. might need funding for a Time Machine AND a Galactic Star Cruiser to help the defense team find the real killer.

Yes Thank you

edited to add: it's not Anne's job to find the real killer imo.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Really curious to see if he's swayed by the silver tongue. If he grants the D an extension for filing their (replacement, mitigating) expert, he hamstrings the State. So will he hold to the original deadlines or will he push the trial from June (and his preferred May) to Seotember?

I don't think this Judge is going to swayed by anything or anyone. He is highly organized and it shows. He expects things to done in a timely fashion as he mentioned and I believe he will stick with the original timeline of May.

I did get the feeling AT was off her normal 'game' during this hearing. In previous hearings it seemed like she was running them rather than the very non confrontational JJJ. I think the new Judge is a good move all the way around.

jmo