My money would be on KG. If there is a connection I hope we find out at trial. MOO
4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #100
- Thread starter ChatteringBirds
- Start date
- Status
newbysleuther
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Messages
- 48
- Reaction score
- 424
Josh Ritter on his Courtroom Confidential YouTube channel made a good point - the defense does not want the unidentified DNA tested. If it's tested and they find who it belongs to, if that person has a rock solid alibi (like out of state hundreds of miles away, and not "star gazing" nearby) then that sinks their alternate suspect theory. The reason AT mentioned it at the hearing was to get everyone talking, which it did. But it still does not explain away the DNA on the sheath. And once the sheath ID'd BK, magically everything else fell into place (like he drove the same suspect vehicle they were looking for). I'm guessing there's tons of other incriminating evidence we don't even know about. If they found a k-bar sheath in his amazon purchases, it's game over.
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2018
- Messages
- 29,587
- Reaction score
- 695,728
He was referring to CODIS, and not IGG. He was also referring to a specific point in time. If any follow up was done, it's entirely possible he wasn't aware of it. It's also possible it was done, and just not mentioned in the context of what was being asked.
"An outrage that it wasn't done." Again, that's not practical, and I'd argue that neither are likely to further the investigation. Please cite a single case ever where more than one sample was sent for IGG analysis.
You literally have the killer's DNA in your possession, and no evidence of any other offenders. You're throwing out numbers like 80% and 100%, which is absolute nonsense based on what we know. I'd say a fraction of a percent to a fraction of a percent.
"What was done appears to be steering the investigation towards one very, very weak piece of evidence..." Again, I don't know how anyone can say that with a straight face. If you're looking at that scene and your first instinct is to test an item that is not the sheath (an object the killer absolutely touched), then I'd argue that not only should you not be a detective, but you should be in some sort of padded room. That's lunacy, and I don't know how any objective person could think that way. It would be an absolutely hilarious scene in some sort of Naked Gun remake though. Frank Drebin seeing the bloody sheath next to the bodies, and then focusing on a random blood spot on a railing away from the crime scene.
One thing solves your case, the other probably doesn't help you at all.
"Nonsense. There was and is no reason this cannot and more importantly should be investigated."
I'm sure it was. But the priority was finding the contributor of that DNA on the sheath, and thus, the killer. Time was of the essence, and they had to pick their best evidence and run with it. Few, if any murder cases have turned to IGG as fast as they did here. They pulled out all the stops, and did an incredible job finding the right guy, and the right guy quickly.
On the outside looking in, this looks like a slam dunk to me. The families know full well they're on the verge of justice, and sadly, there will be people fighting for this quadruple murderer after he is rightfully convicted.
It makes no sense, because this case is incredibly strong at this stage, and we don't know the half of it.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 17,889
- Reaction score
- 297,313
L
AT brings it up at every opportunity, it would take little effort on behalf of the state to test the glove and blood on bannister, it will look worse for the state of they get to trial and the defence can say whose DNA is this inside home, oh and also whose DNA is outside, takes some of the shine of BK DNA being found on an object that in theory AN other person than BK could have carried into the home, BK DNA is on portable object that anybody could have carried into the crime scene, the blood on the bannister was deposited by someone actively bleeding,
It is so not beyond the realm of possibility that someone could have stolen, borrowed or found BK knife/sheath and left it at crime scene, but it is less likely someone is running round with a vial of someone elses blood, this the blood on bannister belongs to whoever and whenever said person deposited it there
If they don't want it tested then they are doing everything within there power to get it tested,
AT brings it up at every opportunity, it would take little effort on behalf of the state to test the glove and blood on bannister, it will look worse for the state of they get to trial and the defence can say whose DNA is this inside home, oh and also whose DNA is outside, takes some of the shine of BK DNA being found on an object that in theory AN other person than BK could have carried into the home, BK DNA is on portable object that anybody could have carried into the crime scene, the blood on the bannister was deposited by someone actively bleeding,
It is so not beyond the realm of possibility that someone could have stolen, borrowed or found BK knife/sheath and left it at crime scene, but it is less likely someone is running round with a vial of someone elses blood, this the blood on bannister belongs to whoever and whenever said person deposited it there
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2018
- Messages
- 990
- Reaction score
- 23,602
Just wanted to take a moment in honor/remembrance of the victims in this case:
Xana, Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan,
Your lives mattered. You were all important and so loved by your family and friends. Each one of you touched/captured the hearts of so many people during your short earthly journey and your bright light will shine on for eternity through those who loved you.
Xana, Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan,
You’ve also touched/captured the hearts of many, many people that never even met/knew you as we follow your story and got to learn more about you through some of your loving family members who graciously shared some of their fondest memories of each of you which gave us a glimpse into the beautiful, bright, happy, loving souls you all were and how much you were loved by your families and friends, and how you/your presence in their lives are greatly missed.
Xana, Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan,
You have the support of thousands upon thousands of people from all over the world supporting/seeking justice for the four of you and your families, as you all so rightly deserve.
Xana, Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan,
You will never be forgotten. xx
May truth and justice prevail!
IMHOO
Xana, Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan,
Your lives mattered. You were all important and so loved by your family and friends. Each one of you touched/captured the hearts of so many people during your short earthly journey and your bright light will shine on for eternity through those who loved you.
Xana, Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan,
You’ve also touched/captured the hearts of many, many people that never even met/knew you as we follow your story and got to learn more about you through some of your loving family members who graciously shared some of their fondest memories of each of you which gave us a glimpse into the beautiful, bright, happy, loving souls you all were and how much you were loved by your families and friends, and how you/your presence in their lives are greatly missed.
Xana, Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan,
You have the support of thousands upon thousands of people from all over the world supporting/seeking justice for the four of you and your families, as you all so rightly deserve.
Xana, Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan,
You will never be forgotten. xx
May truth and justice prevail!
IMHOO
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2018
- Messages
- 29,587
- Reaction score
- 695,728
If the defense was really "doing everything within their power to get it tested," they would file a motion to compel testing. They don't really want that, as it's much better to leave that question unanswered (reasonable doubt and all).
This is just standard defense bluster, and we see it in every case. I'm not fooled.
According to BP, the FBI never said it was BK's DNA on the sheath snap.Read below - Q is AT and A is BP.
Yes, it could mean there is an accomplice. If it does, then that person needs to be apprehended. Surely you would agree that if more than one person committed this crime, they should both or all be arrested, tried and, if found guilty, sentenced? JMO.
Touch or Trace DNA cannot tell us how it got on the sheath or when it got on the sheath AND, in this case, it cannot be said to be BK's DNA. The FBI NEVER identified it as BK's. JMO.
There is no way to know that. What if the back of his glove brushed the bannister once and he didn't even realize it? Don't make excuses for evidence not being tested. JMO.
BF allegedly said she saw a man undress into a bag. Was this the same man DM saw or another man? We don't know yet, but it could be a second assailant. DM also said she was not sure what she saw, it could be a dream and she couldn't even describe the man's eyebrows as dark or light and she did not recognize BK when shown his booking photo. BK is also not by any means the thin/skinny body type she described. I will say the body type DM described fits better with someone who would wear Vans than BK who wears NB which is for wider feet with high arches. She said the man was 5'8" (her height) or taller. BK is 4 inches taller than DM. JMO.
On other cases i have followed the defense conducted its own analysis of mixed and degraded DNA source
Is there anything stopping them here?
it might be why they added a DNA expert.
None of this is unusual in my view.
Is there anything stopping them here?
it might be why they added a DNA expert.
None of this is unusual in my view.
i bet we’ll find there has been some analysis.
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2018
- Messages
- 29,587
- Reaction score
- 695,728
Please stop saying this; it is absolutely misleading:
"Touch or Trace DNA cannot tell us how it got on the sheath or when it got on the sheath AND, in this case, it cannot be said to be BK's DNA. The FBI NEVER identified it as BK's. JMO."
The FBI's job was not to identify the DNA as BK's. That can only be done via confirmation testing, which was done by the crime lab after his arrest.
This isn't a case where the FBI crime lab says "the DNA matches so and so." They were not involved here. This was the FBI doing IGG work, just like companies like Othram do. All they can do is give you a name or names to work with, and law enforcement has to confirm. Just because you come up with a name, does not mean you have conclusively identified the killer.
Payne was crystal clear about this: "They did not, to my knowledge, at any point say Bryan Kohberger's DNA is on the knife sheath."
That would have been absolutely shocking if they did, because IGG does not do that.
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2018
- Messages
- 29,587
- Reaction score
- 695,728
I have no doubt. I'm getting flashbacks to the lack of a rape kit in the Delphi case. Of course it was done.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2019
- Messages
- 3,669
- Reaction score
- 61,170
I believe that every person on this forum is united with you in wanting justice for the gruesome murders of these four students.
Fortuitously, indisputable evidence of the perpetrator was left in a most consequential spot.
DNA is not “Eeny, meeny, miney, moe.” It is infallible proof of a kind that detectives in times past could only wish had been at their disposal.
IMO it’s even more confirmation than a hand-written confession, because in a confession the culprit could still attempt some manner of self-justification.
DNA is yes or no. This was you or it wasn’t you. You were there or you weren’t there.
Thankfully, in pursuit of the justice we unanimously seek, Bryan’s DNA on the sheath shows undeniably—-Bryan WAS there. It WAS him.
Even if your opinion is that he had an accomplice, he still unbuttoned that snap. I would guess that we’d all be most relieved to see him held accountable.
JMO
ETA: I’ve just now seen your rebuttal above to an earlier post of mine. I’m sorry but I cannot agree with the points you’ve made, other than if there are accomplices I’d certainly want them in prison as well.
The DNA has been proven to be Bryan’s. It’s in the PCA and the judge has referenced it multiple times.
Furthermore, why else would AT have tried so desperately to have the DNA thrown out if it didn’t incriminate her client? IMO she’s not going to waste all that time if his DNA was not there.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 17,889
- Reaction score
- 297,313
Let's work this out aloud.
We know why LE swabbed the sheath. Absolute boon to recover undegraded, unmixed DNA, resulting in a single source male profile.
Because of that, we're here. With octoBK.
So what about these other collections?
We haven't heard from the experts but IMO we will.
As of whatever point in time (we can't know what LE has done additionally right up to and including this minute), those samples weren't apparently tested, beyond presumptive testing for blood and enough testing to determine male/female.
Why the hard stop?
1. We don't know that they did stop. We've only heard from a few witnesses, we aren't at trial.
2. Maybe it failed at the mixture step. Two full profiles couldn't be developed. Not enough markers. Then CODIS and IGG are worthless, short kid can't get over the fence.
3. LE lost investigation took a more promising direction. With DNA from the sheath which became a hot lead, then hotter. Molten when it all lined up -- the sheath, the suspect, the general physical description, the car, the phone (black out included), suspect profile. Hot, hot, hot.
4. LE knows what they have. If those other samples are testable, they're available for testing at any point. Maybe they have been, maybe they still can be.
5. Or they can't be because they're not suitable for testing, not then, not now, maybe not ever.
6. Rightful casualty of (ir)relevance. If the handrail blood is ancient artifact, it's not even relevant. Perhaps, like I said, not even enough TO test but arguably so outside the context of this crime, it would be a waste of resources to match with a former renter who papercutted two years before the crime occurred.
7. Cover up? LE is purposefully not testing rock solid DNA in order to frame BK, whom they didn't originally know, by how? Planting his post-arrest DNA on a sheath that was bagged and tested a month earlier? Or is LE protecting the real killers, giving them ample time to Mexico themselves, by not testing their DNA, FBI free pass to the Riviera, um, because why?
8. IMO we will learn at trial that this whole thing with those specimens is nothing but a red herring. The Prosecution knows it, AT knows it, she's just masterfully broadcasting it for public consumption. And the Prosecution isn't worried because this isn't the trial and they're not about to try their case at a pre-Frank Frank's hearing.
9. Here's the thing. This is one thing that I predict will become a no-thing at trial but AT will keep whipping this one thing, and other things, and what really is a thing, now while she can pretend there's error and scandal and incompetence .
10. As @MassGuy has consistently said, if they can, the State will close the door on this. They'll test it if they can just to put the pin in it. If they aren't and haven't, it's likely they cannot. First and most obvious point, no one likely knows when the rail was touched or when the glove was. They may have ZERO connection to the day this crime occurred. Day, week, month... and ZERO connection to anyone who was anywhere never that house on that night.
All JMO
We know why LE swabbed the sheath. Absolute boon to recover undegraded, unmixed DNA, resulting in a single source male profile.
Because of that, we're here. With octoBK.
So what about these other collections?
We haven't heard from the experts but IMO we will.
As of whatever point in time (we can't know what LE has done additionally right up to and including this minute), those samples weren't apparently tested, beyond presumptive testing for blood and enough testing to determine male/female.
Why the hard stop?
1. We don't know that they did stop. We've only heard from a few witnesses, we aren't at trial.
2. Maybe it failed at the mixture step. Two full profiles couldn't be developed. Not enough markers. Then CODIS and IGG are worthless, short kid can't get over the fence.
3. LE lost investigation took a more promising direction. With DNA from the sheath which became a hot lead, then hotter. Molten when it all lined up -- the sheath, the suspect, the general physical description, the car, the phone (black out included), suspect profile. Hot, hot, hot.
4. LE knows what they have. If those other samples are testable, they're available for testing at any point. Maybe they have been, maybe they still can be.
5. Or they can't be because they're not suitable for testing, not then, not now, maybe not ever.
6. Rightful casualty of (ir)relevance. If the handrail blood is ancient artifact, it's not even relevant. Perhaps, like I said, not even enough TO test but arguably so outside the context of this crime, it would be a waste of resources to match with a former renter who papercutted two years before the crime occurred.
7. Cover up? LE is purposefully not testing rock solid DNA in order to frame BK, whom they didn't originally know, by how? Planting his post-arrest DNA on a sheath that was bagged and tested a month earlier? Or is LE protecting the real killers, giving them ample time to Mexico themselves, by not testing their DNA, FBI free pass to the Riviera, um, because why?
8. IMO we will learn at trial that this whole thing with those specimens is nothing but a red herring. The Prosecution knows it, AT knows it, she's just masterfully broadcasting it for public consumption. And the Prosecution isn't worried because this isn't the trial and they're not about to try their case at a pre-Frank Frank's hearing.
9. Here's the thing. This is one thing that I predict will become a no-thing at trial but AT will keep whipping this one thing, and other things, and what really is a thing, now while she can pretend there's error and scandal and incompetence .
10. As @MassGuy has consistently said, if they can, the State will close the door on this. They'll test it if they can just to put the pin in it. If they aren't and haven't, it's likely they cannot. First and most obvious point, no one likely knows when the rail was touched or when the glove was. They may have ZERO connection to the day this crime occurred. Day, week, month... and ZERO connection to anyone who was anywhere never that house on that night.
All JMO
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2017
- Messages
- 11,467
- Reaction score
- 115,671
I diagree that's all. They had the important evidence, the other DNA was to be expected, some random DNA on a high touch area.IMO, there simply is no valid explanation for LE to not have investigated the two unknown male blood DNA samples B and D to the fullest including doing IGG. If these samples were touch/transfer DNA, I would be less concerned about them, but they are blood DNA in a situation where the killer or killers are likely to have gotten cut because at least 2 of the victims, KG and MM, are known to have fought for their lives. JMO.
Possible outcomes from unknown male blood DNA sample B mixed with female DNA and I'm going to put a asterisk (*) by every scenario that might tell the investigator more about the crime:
killer and victim*
killer and unknown female*
killer and known female*
unknown male and victim*
unknown male and unknown female*
unknown male and known female*
known male and known female
known male and victim*
known male and unknown female*
Not enough DNA to evaluate/spoiled sample/degraded sample
JMO.
So, out of 10 possible outcomes, 8 outcomes would have likely told the investigators more about this crime, whereas only 2 outcomes would not. JMO.
Unfortunately, we still don't have clarity about exactly where Unknown Male Sample B was located. There are two bannisters for this particular staircase as seen here in photos 1 and 2 of the living room:
1122 King Road for $1,995/month on PadMapper
1122 King Road is a 6 bed, 3 bath house in Moscow, ID. Search for other sublets, houses and apartment rentals in Moscow, then use our bedroom, bathroom and rent price filters to find your perfect home.www.padmapper.com
There is the horizontal bannister that leads from the area of XK's bedroom to the living room and the angled bannister that leads down the stairs from the living room to the 1st floor. CSI was seen to take a lot of time in the area of the horizontal bannister that leads from the area of XK's bedroom and do quite a bit of swabbing there. But we still don't know the exact location of the blood mixture. JMO.
Possible outcome from the bloody gloves that CSI found outside of 1122 on Nov. 20 and again, I'm placing asterisks on the outcomes that could further knowledge of what happened for investigators:
Killer*
Unknown Male*
Known Male*
If the DNA on the gloves directly matched the DNA on the sheath, then we know it was likely deposited by the killer. The gloves should be examined for cuts/tears. This could be the actual explanation for how the killer's DNA got on the sheath and from that aspect alone, the bloody gloves are very important. This needs to be answered. JMO.
If the DNA on the gloves did not match a known male visitor to the house, then we know there may have been a second killer. JMO.
If the DNA on the gloves matched a known male visitor, then this would lead to follow up questions about 1. why they had on gloves and were bleeding inside them and 2. why the gloves were outside the house in the aftermath of the murders. Questions could have been asked to exclude Unknown Male DNA D. JMO.
So all of the possible outcomes for Unknown Male DNA D would have added to the knowledge base about the crime. JMO.
You could make a supposition that some party guest cut himself at one time or another, and that would be a good screening question for the investigators to ask DM and BF - "Do you know of a time where one of your male guests cut himself and bled inside the house?" and if the answer is yes, then "Do you know what he did about it?" the answer might be "He went in BF's bathroom to get a bandaid," which might explain the blood on the bannister, however, we don't have any evidence that this question was ever asked of DM or BF. The house was completely remodeled in 2019 and changed from a 1 story house with no stairways to a 3 story house, so it is possible that LE could ask this question of everyone who ever lived in that house since the remodel and even the property manager and/or workmen who have been in that house since the remodel. There is not likely to have been more than 2 dozen residents and a handful of workers since 2019 so it is not too onerous of a job to simply call and ask these questions. But there is no evidence that even this simple investigative task was done. To me, an absence of information is just an absence of information and a sign of a lack of detailed investigation. JMOO.
Now, going back to the sheath, RN says this is the part of the sheath that was swabbed:
View attachment 565920
So this indicates that the DNA from the sheath may have been from the bottom side of the snap, which is not powder coated. In fact, it is untreated brass which is known to degrade DNA on contact.
Zinc, Not Copper, Is the Major Contributor to DNA Degradation and PCR Inhibition in DNA Samples Contaminated with Brass
Limited success in DNA recovery and STR profiling from brass substrates, such as ammunition, has been ascribed to oxidative damage and/or inhibition caused by cpapers.ssrn.com
RN also made it clear that the leather portion of the strap was also swabbed in its entirety. There, so far, does not appear to have been an explanation as to exactly where the male DNA was on the snap or leather portion of the strap or if they were swabbed separately. I hope there is further definition of this which will come to light during the trial. It is important for furthering our understanding of the meaning of the touch/transfer DNA in this case. JMO.
All JMO.
And in this case an area peripheral to the crime scene.
If the defense wanted to, they could have/still can engage CC Moore or other to do a genealogocal work up of the sample.
And they didn't leave any trace except for BK's?
What they wiped it throughly but carefully left BK's hidden where it might be missed?
It's out of the realm, imo.
There's no indication or evidence we know of that another person had access to BK's private space beside BK so stolen, borrowed or found its unlikely, imo.
And think about it wouldn't the defense be yelling BK said he lost it! It was stolen! It was borrowed!
Why would they not be saying that?
Becouse they have no one to pin it on. There is not a second stranger DNA on the sheath.
It dead ends at BK.
all imo
How many motions to compel have you seen succeed, I know I haven't seen many, and I have different opinions in that it is an easy thing for state to do, they have the lab, they have the scientists, it's two simple DNA tests, I think they are choosing for whatever reason not to do the tests, leaving the defence a third party defence with evidence of at least one of not two possible SODDI
And BK is at present innocent so I hope the defence blusters as much as the big bad wolf
Considering this is the first time IGG has been used in a current case that is impossible. However, just because it has not been done is not an excuse for not doing it. Either LE wants to get to the right answer or they just want any old solution which may or may not be right. Without following the entire evidence trial to completion, they have only a partial picture of what may have happened. It is weak and it is unjust to the victims and their families. JMO.
My numbers are easily proven by decision science. JMO.
It is focusing on a blood spot within the crime scene. Blood DNA is always better evidence than touch/transfer DNA. Blood DNA proves it was deposited within that house. Touch/transfer DNA could have been deposited on the sheath anytime and anywhere. JMO.
Highly doubtful they have the right guy. The FBI NEVER said its was BK's DNA. Nothing else matches up. There is no DNA evidence in his car, apartment, office, storage unit or at his parents house. He didn't know any of the victims existed much less where they lived. JMO.
The case amounts to touch/transfer DNA which has not even been identified as belonging to BK. This is NOT a strong case based upon what we know so far. JMO.
PS: You are forgetting to put JMO after your statements.
All JMOO.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 17,889
- Reaction score
- 297,313
And.... no witness is going to say that the blood on the sheath is BK's. That's not the right language!
They'll say, and repeat, it's a statistical match on the level of 5 octillion. It's a ratio. It's a comparison study. And it sucks to be BK because that ratio is so itsy bitsy specific it excludes well everybody who's ever lived BUT BK. Hard to fathom a greater statistical match!
It is fascinating to watch AT. She's good.
JMO
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2018
- Messages
- 29,587
- Reaction score
- 695,728
<modsnip: personalizing>
"The case amounts to touch/transfer DNA which has not even been identified as belonging to BK. This is NOT a strong case based upon what we know so far. JMO.
PS: You are forgetting to put JMO after your statements."
When I say my opinion it is clear. When mentioning established fact it is not my opinion. It is a FACT that BK's DNA was identified as being on the sheath, with a probability of 5 plus quadrillion to one.
The FBI did not do that confirmation testing, so they could not possibly say BK's DNA was on that sheath. You are making it sound like the FBI is saying BK's DNA is not on the sheath, which is NOT what they are saying.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
Staff online
-
FraizeAdministrator
-
SillybillyAdministrator
Online statistics
- Members online
- 141
- Guests online
- 1,038
- Total visitors
- 1,179