4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #101

[Nila Aella]

I agree and I would be shocked if she didn't do her own testing--the idea that all this other blood evidence is out there and the defense is just sitting around wondering what's up with that does not match what we know about this defense team. If it's beneficial to them, they'll use it. If it's not, they'll just point at it as being unknown and let it create reasonable doubt.
JMO

We know the D has tested the fingernail mixture and it excluded BK.
If they test it it is discoverable. THey get the sample from the State so the State knows what they are testing.

And the P previously stated in court that they facilitated the D in testing additional trace.

JMO

 

[MassGuy]

I know what swabbing is.
I was pointing out that it wasn't just the snap that was swabbed AND there is male blood DNA on the back of the sheath (not BKs) so it was not as the OP suggested (a cleaned sheath with only one missed area and only BKs DNA on the sheath)
JMO

IF there's male blood on the sheath, then that would mean that Ethan and Xana were killed first. I don't feel like looking back at the documents, are you sure this is what it says?

 

[fcavanaugh]

IMO, the DNA mixture under MM’s fingernail not including the defendant’s BK DNA doesn’t surprise me because this being an ambush/blitz attack with MM likely asleep when attacked, she wouldn’t have had a chance to fight back/scratch BK.

Iirc correctly it was KG and XK that were reported to have put up a fight according to SG I believe it was, not 100% sure though that SG was the source for that info so MOO that KG & XK fought for their lives.

Anyway, imo the DNA mixture under MM fingernail excluding BK is other DNA she likely picked up somewhere during the previous night/early morning out at the bars etc. with her bff KG.

IMHOO

 

[Nila Aella]

Admittedly, I just breezed through that document--couldn't the mixture of blood on the sheath be from MM and KG?
JMO

That's very likely imo

I would go so far as to say almost certain. JMO

The sample was a mixture.
The lab tested BK against this DNA sample.
The lab would not test BK against an all female mixture.
JMO

From the lab reports and notes as well as recent testimony by Rylene Nowlin, it appears that at the sample Q1.1 was a swabbing of the leather strap on the sheath as well as the interior of the snap, not the outer snap surface, which apparently was not sampled in order to preserve the surface for fingerprinting. No serological testing was done on the area swabbed for Q1.1 to identify any biological material.10 An area identified as Q1.4, “swabs of stains on back” of the sheath, tested presumptively positive for blood and was DNA tested. Mr. Kohberger was excluded from this particular sample which was identified as a mixture (ISP Lab Report M2022-4843, #4). Thus, the government has the burden to prove the when and how of the DNA identified in Q1.1.

Page 10

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-6-RE-Rylene-Nowlin-Reference-Touch-Contact-DNA.pdf

 

[Ghostwheel]

I know what swabbing is.
I was pointing out that it wasn't just the snap that was swabbed AND there is male blood DNA on the back of the sheath (not BKs) so it was not as the OP suggested (a cleaned sheath with only one missed area and only BKs DNA on the sheath)
JMO

Just asking, aren't you assuming that the DNA mixture found on the sheath had any male DNA? It says "mixture" which could have been KG and MM. Of course BK would be excluded if it were only female DNA and no one was under any obligation to state if it was all female mixture or a male female mixture (or a male male mixture).

 

[Boxer]

That is making a huge assumption that it was a fresh blood stain.

And why would DM's DNA be in it if it was a fresh blood stain? Just because she walked downstairs in the middle of the night after the murders?

If she touched a fresh bloodstain on the railing as she went down, she would have then seen or felt the wetness on her fingers/hand once she got to BF's room. And I'm pretty confident that if she and BF saw fresh blood on D's hand right after D reported seeing a stranger in the house/hearing weird things that they wouldn't have gone straight to bed and not called 911 until noon. Once you see fresh blood, you can no longer tell yourself that everything is fine.

It can't be DM's DNA being on the railing first from going to BF's room and then the killer touching it and leaving blood---because the killer had already left the house at that point. And I think we can be very safe in knowing that the killer had left before she went down--because those two girls now in DM's room would have been on high alert for the sounds of someone creeping down the that flight of stairs.

Wouldn't a house resident's DNA be all over high touch area in the house anyway?

 

[Ghostwheel]

Kind of interesting

DNA Mixtures: A Forensic Science Explainer

What are DNA mixtures? And why are they sometimes so difficult to interpret?

www.nist.gov

 

[Karin1974]

I do not consider a knife holder to be part of a knife. I do not consider a holster to be part of a gun. I do not consider a glass container to be part of a poisonous substance that might be placed in it. I do not consider an aquarium to be part of the deadly fish it may hold.

Please note I did not say the sheath wasn't potentially important. A holster, glass container, or an aquarium might be important in other situations. But in most situations I don't consider holders or cases to be parts of the thing they may (or may not) hold. You may find that view astonishing but I'm just as astonished people would think the opposite. Fortunately, we are all entitled to our opinions. Because both viewers are simply that-- personal opinions. Not hard facts, just opinions.
MOO

IMO - Your view seems to support that you believe the knife that stabbed the four victims has no correlation to the sheath found beneath/beside one of the victims? So that means you’re basically saying the sheath is just a random item that coincidentally has no bearing on the weapon that was used to murder them? With full respect, you get a double wow. MOO.

 

[Nila Aella]

IF there's male blood on the sheath, then that would mean that Ethan and Xana were killed first. I don't feel like looking back at the documents, are you sure this is what it says?

Why would that indicate E and X were first?
JMO

Just asking, aren't you assuming that the DNA mixture found on the sheath had any male DNA? It says "mixture" which could have been KG and MM. Of course BK would be excluded if it were only female DNA and no one was under any obligation to state if it was all female mixture or a male female mixture (or a male male mixture).

RN describing how a mixture is handled
Page 65

the first step is determining number of contributors to that mixture, then our laboratory utilizes a software program to help break out the components of that mixture. When one individual is male, it's not always possible to say the gender of the second person. Males have an X and a Y chromosome, females only have an X. So if there's an X and a Y present, it could be one male, it could be two males, it could be male and a female.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022125-Transcript-Redacted-hearing-held-Jan23-2025.pdf

JMO

 

[wendy44]

It's hard to believe an unidentified male profile on the sheath, or even a partial profile, would not be front and center at the request for a Franks hearing as something that would be potentially exculpatory and should have been included in the PCA.
JMO

 

[Megnut]

AT is tossing salad again.

I'll wager right now the mixture of DNA is from MM and KG and AT knows this.

She can say, with a straight face, BK is excluded because THERE WAS NO Yin the mixture.

She wants to leave the impression that there's male DNA that didn't match BK but I think that facts will show he's excluded by virtue of the sample containing only female DNA.

Shell game.

It's nuts.

JMO

 

[MassGuy]

Why would that indicate E and X were first?
JMO

RN describing how a mixture is handled
Page 65

the first step is determining number of contributors to that mixture, then our laboratory utilizes a software program to help break out the components of that mixture. When one individual is male, it's not always possible to say the gender of the second person. Males have an X and a Y chromosome, females only have an X. So if there's an X and a Y present, it could be one male, it could be two males, it could be male and a female.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022125-Transcript-Redacted-hearing-held-Jan23-2025.pdf

JMO

Because the sheath was found with MM and KG. If they were killed first, and the sheath then left there, then there should be no male blood on it whatsoever. If there's male blood on it, then it has to be Ethan's, and that would mean he and Xana were killed first, before BK moved on to MM and KG, when he left the sheath.

If this male blood was unidentified, then the defense would be screaming to the heavens about it, instead of pointing to a blood drop on a railing.

If it belonged to BK, we'd know about that too.

So I'm questioning the veracity of this, as there's no way I'm the first to come to this conclusion. Unless there was no male blood on the sheath.

 

[Ghostwheel]

Why would that indicate E and X were first?
JMO

RN describing how a mixture is handled
Page 65

the first step is determining number of contributors to that mixture, then our laboratory utilizes a software program to help break out the components of that mixture. When one individual is male, it's not always possible to say the gender of the second person. Males have an X and a Y chromosome, females only have an X. So if there's an X and a Y present, it could be one male, it could be two males, it could be male and a female.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022125-Transcript-Redacted-hearing-held-Jan23-2025.pdf

JMO

I'm sorry, where does that say there was any male DNA in the mixture? I only see this:
"One of the mixtures, did it have a male DNA profile? A. I believe it did."

One of the mixtures. Not all of the mixtures. ETA: and that one mixture is not identified as the one on the sheath at any point.

 

[Boxer]

It's hard to believe an unidentified male profile on the sheath, or even a partial profile, would not be front and center at the request for a Franks hearing as something that would be potentially exculpatory and should have been included in the PCA.
JMO

So hard to believe that pursuing it it can't be in the defenses best interest.

 

[al66pine]

"Behavior Pattern" or Propensity Evidence

I'm not an attorney but I thought "behavior pattern" evidence was rarely admissable to show criminal guilt. So evidence that after having a few beers he acted in obnoxious ways towards women in a bar in PA would not be admissable but if it was, it would purportedly show he was "the type of person" to have killed 3 women and 1 man. Therefore, if hearing that evidence, jurors should conclude he probably did kill the students in Idaho. And so far as his behavior in Idaho went, supposedly the university investigated his behavior as a TA and didn't find support for the notion his behavior was problematic towards women. Regardless, as a practical matter, how can anonymous complainants from the university be called up to testify?
MOO

@NCWatcher Seems ^ post is referring to this ID rule.

"Idaho Rules of Evidence Rule 404. Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts.
"(a)....
"(b) Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts.
"(1) Prohibited Uses. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.

"(2) Permitted Uses; Notice in a Criminal Case. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. In a criminal case, the prosecutor must:

"(A) file and serve reasonable notice of the general nature of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial; and

"(B) do so reasonably in advance of trial – or during trial if the court, for good cause shown, excuses lack of pretrial notice."
I.R.E. 404. Character Evidence not Admissible to Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes. | Supreme Court

 

[Odeto BJ]

I have no doubt they mapped the depth and dimensions of the stab wounds. There is likely bruising from the guard on the hilt around the wounds. I think they're going to be sure with a high degree of certainty the style and size of knife. The sheath is just going to give the perfect tangible corroboration for that body evidence, which is based on interpretation.

MOO

All accurate...KaBars do come in specific shapes and sizes: but all the bigger knives have a relief channel on both sides of the blade and a blade guard/hilt. Also, as a poster indicated many moons ago, (10ofRods maybe?) all the larger fixed blade knives have one of two variants of proprietary coating on the blade. Presuming the ME was aware of those coatings, and presuming also that the blade contacted bone or substantial ligament with some portion other than the sharp edge, the presence of that coating in any of the wound paths would confirm that the knife was a KaBar. If the relief path, blade tip, relief channel and hilt all indicate a KaBar and more, a specific model: Connecting the absent murder weapon to the sheaf with both the KaBar and the USMC logo embossed in it, is...well, a slam dunk. BARD.

Considering that one of AT's motions is aimed at exclusion of Amazon "clicks", the trail there might not be an actual knife purchase, which the D certainly could not keep out of evidence if a purchase could be directly linked to BK. Amazon apparently sells a lot of knives because they have an option/filter screen for Manufacturer, Vendor, Size, Duty and much more. Cycling through those filters generates a memory line-item every time the screen changes...so changing vendors while holding Manufacturer=KaBar generates a "click" for each vendor. One quick session made 26 memory entries....

All JMO of course.

As comment: my library list by intervals, appears a whole lot more nefarious because of my involvement with WS.....Got to hope no one is watching.

 

[MassGuy]

All accurate...KaBars do come in specific shapes and sizes: but all the bigger knives have a relief channel on both sides of the blade and a blade guard/hilt. Also, as a poster indicated many moons ago, (10ofRods maybe?) all the larger fixed blade knives have one of two variants of proprietary coating on the blade. Presuming the ME was aware of those coatings, and presuming also that the blade contacted bone or substantial ligament with some portion other than the sharp edge, the presence of that coating in any of the wound paths would confirm that the knife was a KaBar. If the relief path, blade tip, relief channel and hilt all indicate a KaBar and more, a specific model: Connecting the absent murder weapon to the sheaf with both the KaBar and the USMC logo embossed in it, is...well, a slam dunk. BARD.

Considering that one of AT's motions is aimed at exclusion of Amazon "clicks", the trail there might not be an actual knife purchase, which the D certainly could not keep out of evidence if a purchase could be directly linked to BK. Amazon apparently sells a lot of knives because they have an option/filter screen for Manufacturer, Vendor, Size, Duty and much more. Cycling through those filters generates a memory line-item every time the screen changes...so changing vendors while holding Manufacturer=KaBar generates a "click" for each vendor. One quick session made 26 memory entries....

All JMO of course.

As comment: my library list by intervals, appears a whole lot more nefarious because of my involvement with WS.....Got to hope no one is watching.

In regards to the "click" activity, I think it's relevant regardless of if they have the knife purchase or not. I don't see it as an indication that they do not, as there are other incriminating purchases he would have made (or looked into making) as well.

A set of dark covered coveralls, or coveralls in general.
Booties, gloves, mask, seat cover, etc.

I buy a lot of stuff from Amazon, but I also research things on Amazon and buy them elsewhere. I also look things up on Amazon and never buy them.

Whether this actually comes in is another matter. I think the defense made some good arguments there.

 

[mickey2942]

I don't see any tela

AT is tossing salad again.

I'll wager right now the mixture of DNA is from MM and KG and AT knows this.

She can say, with a straight face, BK is excluded because THERE WAS NO Yin the mixture.

She wants to leave the impression that there's male DNA that didn't match BK but I think that facts will show he's excluded by virtue of the sample containing only female DNA.

Shell game.

It's nuts.

JMO

So, let's say that they manage to find 12 of the most gracious people in Idaho for BK's jury. And they believe every word AT says. And BK is found "Not Guilty".

Then what? He just leaves the courtroom. That is some scary stuff right there.

Don’t forget OJ, and Casey Anthony.

 

[MassGuy]

I don't see any tela


So, let's say that they manage to find 12 of the most gracious people in Idaho for BK's jury. And they believe every word AT says. And BK is found "Not Guilty".

Then what? He just leaves the courtroom. That is some scary stuff right there.

Don’t forget OJ, and Casey Anthony.

What's scarier is that it's on a complete different level to OJ and Casey Anthony.

Both of them killed for personal reasons, OJ was more of your standard domestic homicide, with an additional unfortunate victim. Anthony wanted to be free of her daughter, and live it up. Killers like that are much less likely to reoffend than someone like BK.

This guy killed four people for kicks, and someone like that will always be a threat.

I think the worst case scenario is a hung jury, and if that happens I'll eat my hat.

 

[Odeto BJ]

In regards to the "click" activity, I think it's relevant regardless of if they have the knife purchase or not. I don't see it as an indication that they do not, as there are other incriminating purchases he would have made (or looked into making) as well.

A set of dark covered coveralls, or coveralls in general.
Booties, gloves, mask, seat cover, etc.

I buy a lot of stuff from Amazon, but I also research things on Amazon and buy them elsewhere. I also look things up on Amazon and never buy them.

Whether this actually comes in is another matter. I think the defense made some good arguments there.

Fundamentally, agreeing to all. While a purchase history connected directly to BK of anything that could be content of an M-Kit or of efforts to deflect detection, would be relevant and inculpatory evidence...click history alone in the AI driven Madison Avenue approach of Amazon, is highly nebulous as the motion indicates. Especially with a shared account over multiple devices.
Portion of the argument revolves around the D not knowing what the "expert" can derive from the data. I believe they would get that by deposing that person, at least in terms of what the data "means" to him.

I would suggest that drilling down through those filters shows specificity, deliberation and a definitively conscious path, even if it does not result in a purchase. If that occurred on BK's own cell phone targeting a specific knife would think it relevant and evidentiary. If it targeted the purchase of kitchen gloves or painter's dropcloths, well, not so much. The history I referenced earlier was from Firefox, on my PC...I have no idea how much of a record it created at Amazon.

I think this one may split the baby, early paragraph does contain "Purchases" and irrespective of all the variables the purchase of a Kabar and a corresponding sheath by anyone on the account would be highly relevant. The disposition fo the rest would be highly dependent on How a specific data item got on Amazon's records, so as a generality, AT has a basis to try to limit this moreso than some of the other....uh...fodder.
The challenges of expanding technology and the intrusiveness of the internet powerhouses....Lots of law to be written around it as we are seeing in a variety of recent cases.

JMO