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

[Kemug]

Eyes are the windows to the soul, good or bad IMO.

RSBM
In which case, BK's eyebrows are the blinds that try to hide his soul.

 

[Swansee]

A few thoughts on these latest filings.
The DNA found under MM's fingernails: It's not BK's, but more importantly IMO since Maddie is the one victim that was most likely asleep and didn't fight back, why would the Defense care about it being in or out? Why did the State also bring this up as potentially "exculpatory" in a GJ when it isn't, but simply irrelevant (IMO) since she clearly was sleeping and not able to put up any kind of fight?
I don't see the point of motions to exclude something that's just completely irrelevant to the case. IMO it's like if they were filing motions to exclude the contents of the fridge or how many pairs of socks the victims owned. Why bother?
I'd be much more interested in finding out about DNA under XK's fingernails, since we know she did fight back. But MM honestly I don't see why either party would bring up at all.

But the one that really stumps me is: why does the Defense want to exclude any reference to "touch" or "transfer" DNA? As we've seen in discussions here in many threads, the notion of "touch" DNA that can result in things like the Lukis Anderson case was IMO something the Defense could have used to sow doubt in the minds of jurors. Why on earth does the Defense want to deprive themselves of this avenue? I'd understand if this were a motion from the State, but I'm baffled as to why the Defense wants this excluded.

 

[sunshineray]

The blood sample was DNA tested.
It does raise questions about order.
JMO

The D has brought up A (sheath), B (railing), and D (gloves).
JMO

It doesn't belong to BK because he was excluded.
JMO



The above mixture in your post is referring to the trash pull mixture (BKs DNA).

The sheath:
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).

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

There was blood on the back of the sheath.
It was DNA tested.
It was a mixture.
BK was excluded.

RN IGG transcript pg 76

So on this item I believe there was also blood, so they would have been targeting that separate and then also trying to determine who may have handled that, so they would have specifically honed in on an area that whoever handled it would have had to have touched and maybe touched repeatedly.

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

JMO

It's very important to distinguish between it being blood DNA or touch DNA ("to determine who handled it") It could, in theory, belong to manufacturing DNA of a worker on the item tested. This would be even more pertinent if the knife and sheath stayed in it's packaging up until the murders. JMO

 

[MassGuy]

The defense is going to be filing two more challenges to the death penalty.

Defendants Motion for Leave to File

 

[Megnut]

The defense is going to be filing two more challenges to the death penalty.

Defendants Motion for Leave to File

It's really the only place the Defense can impact.

 

[rkjester]

Taylor acknowledged that is the most significant issue ahead at trial. “I mean, that’s the ultimate question that will be before a jury,” Taylor said. “What does a knife sheath at a scene mean?”

Hippler shot back: “If you’re killed with a knife, that probably means a lot.” “It might,” she said.

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article299620254.html

 

[SteveP]

Do not wish for this to become a debate about the morality of the death penalty, but death by firing squad, as Idaho's primary means of execution, is only a governor's signature away from becoming law. Counting the days until the defense files a motion stating that death by firing squad is inhumane...unlike, I suppose, death by being brutally carved up with a Ka-Bar knife. JMO

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/05/us/firing-squad-idaho-execution/index.html

 

[arielilane]

I suspect y'all have already discussed these; however I am way behind w/reading and sorting through docs.
Needed to bring it up! Were these filed because he's a psychopath, sociopath, murderer w/bushy eyebrows and a certain murder weapon... just saying... moo
I dont recall such frivolous filings; and Im sure there are more to be had.

2/24/2025

Motion seeks to bar the use of the terms “psychopath” and "sociopath.”

Prohibiting use of the words “murder,” “murderer,” “murdered,” “murder weapon,” and similar forms of the word “murder” applied to BK during the trial of this matter.

Excluding any evidence referencing “bushy eyebrows."

• Defense Motion in Limine #3 RE Use of the Term Murder
• Defense Motion in Limine #4 RE Using the Terms Psychopath or Sociopath
• Defense Motion in Limine #7 RE Witness Identification by Bushy Eyebrows

State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger

 

[Balthazar]

That blood could EASILY have been left by whoever installed the handrail.

College house, how often do you suppose that handrail was cleaned? Ever?

And how often do college kids even use a handrail?

Even underused, it's likely it was used occasionally and it's possible that touch DNA was left and ONLY collected because, presumably, a presumptive test indicated for the blood and the touch DNA came along for the ride. If it really is a mixture.

There really is no evidence IMO to support one spot of blood on that particular handrail being connected to crime scene blood.

JMO

Usually in these types of college rentals, the company that owns the house has to have it cleaned thoroughly between groups of tenants.

If that spot of blood matches to other crime scene evidence in the house, then it is probably connected to the crime scene. Untested, we don't know if it is or is not. A lack of information is proof of nothing. That CSI noted that the spot exists and presumably collected it is enough to tell me that CSI felt the spot was of value as evidence.

 

[Cindizzi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1897687082102923741

 

[Balthazar]

I'm still waiting to see a single shred of evidence pointing to multiple knives and/or another person with a knife.

the reason i don't put any value into the handrail dna is that there's no other supporting evidence that points to BK having an accomplice or someone else doing it. just one tiny piece in support of the handrail DNA would likely change my mind. MOO

I'm still waiting.

MOO

The bloodspot on the handrail may have nothing whatsoever to do with an accomplice. It is only a piece of the full picture of what may have happened inside that house.

 

[MassGuy]

Usually in these types of college rentals, the company that owns the house has to have it cleaned thoroughly between groups of tenants.

If that spot of blood matches to other crime scene evidence in the house, then it is probably connected to the crime scene. Untested, we don't know if it is or is not. A lack of information is proof of nothing. That CSI noted that the spot exists and presumably collected it is enough to tell me that CSI felt the spot was of value as evidence.

I remember when I moved into my apartment in college, my mom saw the state of it and cried; there was no thorough cleaning between tenants.

We know for a fact that blood spot does not match other evidence in the house, nor does it match the blood on that glove outside. We know this because it WAS tested, which is also how we know it belongs to a male.

It was apparently not put into CODIS, which is a difference.

 

[Megnut]

I suspect y'all have already discussed these; however I am way behind w/reading and sorting through docs.
Needed to bring it up! Were these filed because he's a psychopath, sociopath, murderer w/bushy eyebrows and a certain murder weapon... just saying... moo
I dont recall such frivolous filings; and Im sure there are more to be had.

2/24/2025

Motion seeks to bar the use of the terms “psychopath” and "sociopath.”

Prohibiting use of the words “murder,” “murderer,” “murdered,” “murder weapon,” and similar forms of the word “murder” applied to BK during the trial of this matter.

Excluding any evidence referencing “bushy eyebrows."

• Defense Motion in Limine #3 RE Use of the Term Murder
• Defense Motion in Limine #4 RE Using the Terms Psychopath or Sociopath
• Defense Motion in Limine #7 RE Witness Identification by Bushy Eyebrows

State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger

It's like a road map. You look at what the Defense focuses on and you can infer State's evidence.

Don't call him what he is because it'll bias the jury against him.

No, I say the evidence will do that well enough.

JMO

 

[sunshineray]

A few thoughts on these latest filings.
The DNA found under MM's fingernails: It's not BK's, but more importantly IMO since Maddie is the one victim that was most likely asleep and didn't fight back, why would the Defense care about it being in or out? Why did the State also bring this up as potentially "exculpatory" in a GJ when it isn't, but simply irrelevant (IMO) since she clearly was sleeping and not able to put up any kind of fight?
I don't see the point of motions to exclude something that's just completely irrelevant to the case. IMO it's like if they were filing motions to exclude the contents of the fridge or how many pairs of socks the victims owned. Why bother?
I'd be much more interested in finding out about DNA under XK's fingernails, since we know she did fight back. But MM honestly I don't see why either party would bring up at all.

But the one that really stumps me is: why does the Defense want to exclude any reference to "touch" or "transfer" DNA? As we've seen in discussions here in many threads, the notion of "touch" DNA that can result in things like the Lukis Anderson case was IMO something the Defense could have used to sow doubt in the minds of jurors. Why on earth does the Defense want to deprive themselves of this avenue? I'd understand if this were a motion from the State, but I'm baffled as to why the Defense wants this excluded.

Because there is touch DNA from BK on the sheath that was lying under a victim?

 

[sunshineray]

IMO AT has seen the reports and knows what the evidence is.

JMO

And what it's not, MO.

 

[sunshineray]

Are we really doing this...

"AT has a bombshell she's ready to drop at any moment now that's going to blow open this case!"

...thing again?

MOO

Ahhh but will she have any case law to back up her bombshell arguements...that is the question. Her track record hasn't been awfully good in that respect. JMO

 

[Balthazar]

I remember when I moved into my apartment in college, my mom saw the state of it and cried; there was no thorough cleaning between tenants.

We know for a fact that blood spot does not match other evidence in the house, nor does it match the blood on that glove outside. We know this because it WAS tested, which is also how we know it belongs to a male.

It was apparently not put into CODIS, which is a difference.

Nowadays not cleaning between tenants is usually against state law as it can endanger the tenant's health. Given, some property management companies do a better job than others.

https://www.ag.idaho.gov/content/uploads/2023/07/LandlordTenant.pdf

JMO, but I believe it is important to investigate all of the evidence in the crime scene which the CSI team decided was important. It's not about finding another suspect, it's about finding out, inasmuch as is possible, exactly what happened inside that house.

 

[arielilane]

It's like a road map. You look at what the Defense focuses on and you can infer State's evidence.

Don't call him what he is because it'll bias the jury against him.

No, I say the evidence will do that well enough.

JMO

Exactly, the evidence will call him all those things and more. moo

 

[sunshineray]

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

Maybe not kitchen knives, although I do own some very sharp ones that came with their own sheaths. The type of knife being discussed in these murders is as sharp a knife as you can get, having a sheath for it is like having a safety switch on a gun. Only a fool would carry around a knife that sharp on their person without a sheath. They go together, for safety. AJMO

 

[Cool Cats]

I'm trying to catch up here. Some posts are mentioning the sheath was covered in blood?
Where is this coming from?

I thought there was no mention of anything on the sheath except BK 's touch DNA on the sheath snap.

I expect there to be victim blood on it because it was found under a bloody victim.