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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

GRT said:
Odds are -- LE didn't plant the DNA. Odds are -- BK is a killer.

But, looking at an ABC timeline, and I think the Defense will probably use this, Kohberger's name first popped up because a WSU officer spotted a white Elantra and discovered it was BK's.



Nearly a month later, LE said they'd found DNA on the knife sheath.
Click to expand...
No, it was not a month later that they 'found' DNA on the sheath----It was a month later that they IDENTIFIED the DNA on the sheath.
They found DNA on the sheath , unknownDNA at the time, just 7 days after the murders. But it took a month to identify the DNA as BK.

But the most important date is the day they SENT the DNA to the State Lab, imo. Because it had to be within a day or two of the killings, which means they didn't know about the bushy eyebrows or the Nissan yet, IMO.
GRT said:
It could be they found it sooner but keep it to themselves, but if so, why did it take so long to arrest BK? He wasn't arrested until Dec 30.



The other interesting thing is that the State says they're not going to use the IGG DNA evidence in court. I wonder why not? I mean, they say the IGG was what led them to BK.

And they won't release the records that show how the IGG traced the sheath DNA to BK.

If they'd had the IGG evidence sooner, I would think they would have Pennsylvania officers going through BK's family's trash sooner to look for a familial match.

So, to me, MOO, it looks like the IGG DNA came after the car. That doesn't mean BK is innocent. I think he's guilty. But, the optics are odd, indeed.
Click to expand...
I don't think that is bad optics. Doing IGG takes a long time. The most important thing is that DNA matching BK was at the crime scene---and that DNA was sent to the crime lab within a day or two after the murders. So they did not have enough time to look for a viable patsy to stitch up for the charges. IMO

They could not know about the bushy eyebrows and White Nissan before the DNA sample was sent to the State Lab.
 
Last edited:
GRT said:
I haven't seen any court documents that mentioned the Nissan either. As far as I know, that's just what they were looking for. According to the NYT, there are records that back that up.

As far as the IGG, I don't think they got the timeline and pattern they were asking for. They got something, I think back in May, but the State protested anything more being released, if memory serves.

The question, as I understand it, that the Defense wants answered is whether LE went from the car to the IGG or from the IGG to the car.

They seem to be insinuating (just my take) that someone might have planted or manipulated the DNA. It's hard to know, specifically, thanks to the gag order.
Click to expand...
But it would have to have been planted before November 14th or 15th, because that's when LE sent it out to the State Lab. So it doesn't matter if they went to car first or IGG first, because either way, the DNA sample had already been sent off to the State Lab. No way they could plant it or manipulate it after it was sent out. IMO
 
maskedwoman said:
That came from a defense consultant's testimony at a hearing. That doesn't make it true. MOO
Click to expand...
OP's ref has nothing to do with the sheathe DNA. It's taken from defense's witness Bicka Barlow's affidavit responding to item 3.2 (mistakenly written as item 4.2 by Barlow,) of defense's 3rd Motion to Compel. Both dated 22nd June 2023.

Just bouncing off your post to add the following:

I finally looked up 3rd MOT to put this matter to rest. Imo it confirms beyond all doubt that Barlow is addressing the three unknown male profiles when she discusses examples from other cases on pp 11 -13 of her affidavit (* note, there is NO page 15 in her affidavit ). As an aside, these profiles were ineligible for entry to CODIS according to BT at Aug 28 2023 hearing on 3rd MOT. Moo

Section 3.2 of 3rd MOT (mistakenly referred to as Section 4.2 in Barlow's Declaration) is as follows:

"3.2 For each hit, please provide Match Detail Reports and long-form
Candidate Match Reports
for the hit(s) including partial hits and hits that are dispositioned to be non matching (even if the laboratory has dispositioned profile as hit). "

And at the bottom of section 3 of 3rd MOT, the defense asserts the following:

"The State has provided information related to this request for the DNA on the snap of the Knife sheath only. The Defense has requested all DNA profiles including additional profiles developed during the course of
law enforcement investigation. See Declarations of counsel for Mr. Kohberger, Bicka Barlow and Steve Mercer filed...".

In other words, Imo there is no way Barlow is referring to the sheathe DNA when she talks about this very item 3.2 (which she calls 4.2) on pp 12-13 ( *not p15 which doesn't exist) of her declaration/affidavit in support of 3rd MOT.

Dated 22 June 2023


 
Why is all of this recent stuff sealed?
I understand the gag order regarding details of the case, but if this is just about paying the defense lawyers... It's Idaho taxpayer money if I'm not mistaken: Doesn't the public have a right to see it?
 
Swansee said:
Why is all of this recent stuff sealed?
I understand the gag order regarding details of the case, but if this is just about paying the defense lawyers... It's Idaho taxpayer money if I'm not mistaken: Doesn't the public have a right to see it?
Click to expand...
Eventually the public will know what was done. It is taxpayer money being spent as all government money is. But, of course, taxpayers don't have any sort of "line item veto." I'm not an attorney but I suspect there are a few reasons materials are sealed now.

1) There will be lots of public screaming about expenses in some sectors. Often people really have no idea how much trial expenses usually are. And these are expenses that are largely unavoidable to guarantee a fair trial (and to protect against a guilty verdict being overturned. If nothing else, having to have a redo surely would increase expenses!) Expenses are also much higher than for some trials because it is a DP case. Given that one of the victim's family members has already been quite vocal about taxpayers paying expenses (& wanting to know who paid for BK's suit, for example), I expect this judge recognizes the potentially prejudicial effect pre-trial publicity about financial issues could have.

2) Full disclosure of some attorney expenses at this point MIGHT inadvertantly reveal aspects of the defense's strategy to the state. I suspect that's one reason the meeting was ex parte.

3) It sounds like to me there may be some internal Idaho politics at play. If so, I can understand the judge keeping materials under wraps for now.

MOO
 
  • Voir dire shall commence on July 30, 2025 @ 9:00 am
  • The jury trial shall commence on August 11, 2025 to November 7, 2025, inclusive of the penalty phase, if necessary.
  • Trial will begin each day at 8:30 am and conclude at approximately 3:30 pm with a lunch break of approximately 45 minutes, Monday - Friday
  • Final pre-trial conference will be held on May 15, 2025 @ 9:00 am and continue May 16, 2025, if necessary.



10/09/2024 Redacted Order Governing Proceedings and Notice of Trial Setting


 
Megnut said:
So trial pushed back to August, 2025. :/
Click to expand...
If the trial was to be moved from a June start date as the judge suggested needed to be done to try to accommodate jurors with kids, August makes much more sense to me than the options he initially offered. (May or Sept) This way there won't be months of summer where different child care arrangements have to be made by jurors who have kids. And it doesn't delay the trial for as long as the Sept option. Seems like a good compromise to me. And if a penalty phase is needed, better there not be a long break between it & the guilt phase.
minazoe said:
this case is going to expose a great deal about Bryan. get ready, the prosecution is going to decimate him. mOO
Click to expand...
I hope the prosecution presents evidence related to the crime rather than "he's a weirdo" type of evidence!
MOO
 
NCWatcher said:
If the trial was to be moved from a June start date as the judge suggested needed to be done to try to accommodate jurors with kids, August makes much more sense to me than the options he initially offered. (May or Sept) This way there won't be months of summer where different child care arrangements have to be made by jurors who have kids. And it doesn't delay the trial for as long as the Sept option. Seems like a good compromise to me. And if a penalty phase is needed, better there not be a long break between it & the guilt phase.

I hope the prosecution presents evidence related to the crime rather than "he's a weirdo" type of evidence!
MOO
Click to expand...

really? I want to hear all about him..how he was a junky..how he creeps around at night, how he has stalked women..all the details of what he did in weeks prior and after...honestly wondering if he has done this before...and what all has gone on near his family home base. Once he is convicted they will run codis on his DNA. mOO
 
NCWatcher said:
If the trial was to be moved from a June start date as the judge suggested needed to be done to try to accommodate jurors with kids, August makes much more sense to me than the options he initially offered. (May or Sept) This way there won't be months of summer where different child care arrangements have to be made by jurors who have kids. And it doesn't delay the trial for as long as the Sept option. Seems like a good compromise to me. And if a penalty phase is needed, better there not be a long break between it & the guilt phase.

I hope the prosecution presents evidence related to the crime rather than "he's a weirdo" type of evidence!
MOO
Click to expand...
DBM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 154 more.
Total: 372 (members: 155, guests: 217)

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
217
Total visitors
372
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,936
Messages
18,247,856
Members
234,510
Latest member
Sarcon
Back
Top