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

[Gigiky]

DNA evidence from three individuals found under MM finger nails come back as inconclusive.
Does this mean that there is no further testing that can be done to get a more accurate out come?
If anyone knows? TIA.

 

[Balthazar]

I don’t think they all saw her. I think it was one person and then things were relayed to the others.

That foundation blood thing was Daily Mail nonsense. There’s no evidence that was blood, and it makes no sense that blood could drip through the walls and floors.

The foundation blood was confirmed by Cathy Mabbutt at the 30:35 mark here:

https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/banfield/coroner-idaho-students-CHj1JuE6BvT/

<modsnip: personalizing>

 

[MassGuy]

The foundation blood was confirmed by Cathy Mabbutt at the 30:35 mark here:

https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/banfield/coroner-idaho-students-CHj1JuE6BvT/

<modsnip: personalizing>

<modsnip: personalizing>

I have never heard this podcast, and I can't get it to play, but I'll take your word for it that it was confirmed as being victim's blood.

 

[Balthazar]

I hope I am not reposting it. It just popped up in my Google news today.

Idaho student killings: Three-person mixture of unknown DNA found under fingernails of Madison Mogen, filing shows | CNN

A three-person mixture of unknown DNA was found under a 21-year-old University of Idaho student’s fingernails after she and three other students were killed at an off-campus home in November 2022, a new filing reveals.

amp.cnn.com

If I understand correctly, the defense insists on the DNAs found under MM’s fingernails tested, and the prosecution doesn’t think it is necessary?

Correct. The prosecution did not have unknown male DNA B, C or D run through CODIS or tested to the point of doing IGG on them to determine who they were from. BT said they did not run them against CODIS in an early hearing as they didn't meet the requirements. Not sure if this mixture under MM's nail is unknown male DNA C or if the blood on the sheath which was also a mixture was unknown male DNA C or if these are unknown DNA mixtures outside of unknown male DNA, B, C or D. Unknown male DNA B is a bloodstain on the bannister between the 2nd and first floor, allegedly a mixture per AT's question to Rylene Nowlin (she didn't remember if it was a mixture or not.) Unknown male DNA D is blood from inside the gloves collected by CSI on Nov. 20, 2022 during their search of the yard. We don't know for certain what Unknown Male C is other than that it was found inside 1122. And now we have yet another unknown mixture under MM's fingernail.

 

[Charlot123]

Correct. The prosecution did not have unknown male DNA B, C or D run through CODIS or tested to the point of doing IGG on them to determine who they were from. BT said they did not run them against CODIS in an early hearing as they didn't meet the requirements. Not sure if this mixture under MM's nail is unknown male DNA C or if the blood on the sheath which was also a mixture was unknown male DNA C or if these are unknown DNA mixtures outside of unknown male DNA, B, C or D. Unknown male DNA B is a bloodstain on the bannister between the 2nd and first floor, allegedly a mixture per AT's question to Rylene Nowlin (she didn't remember if it was a mixture or not.) Unknown male DNA D is blood from inside the gloves collected by CSI on Nov. 20, 2022 during their search of the yard. We don't know for certain what Unknown Male C is other than that it was found inside 1122. And now we have yet another unknown mixture under MM's fingernail.

Well, this is incomplete investigative genealogy then.

How can the fact that a touch DNA on a knife shield was run through MH site but nothing was done with DNAs B C or D from even such sources as fingernails?

 

[MassGuy]

Well, this is incomplete investigative genealogy then.

How can the fact that a touch DNA on a knife shield was run through MH site but nothing was done with DNAs B C or D from even such sources as fingernails?

You can't run IGG on items you do not reasonably believe to be connected to the offender.

They knew the DNA on the sheath almost certainly belonged to the killer, and they went with that. It was unquestionably their best evidence.

We have no idea what was done in regards to testing with those other samples.

 

[Megnut]

You can't run IGG on items you do not reasonably believe to be connected to the offender.

They knew the DNA on the sheath almost certainly belonged to the killer, and they went with that. It was unquestionably their best evidence.

We have no idea what was done in regards to testing with those other samples.

And LE still has whatever samples were collected.

There are reasons samples reach investigative pause. Full profiles can't be developed. Further testing would be consumption. It's female DNA so further testing isn't indicated.

Likely it's good analysis, following standard practices.

As AT forces her own hand, the State may now be testing whatever is testable just to put false claims to bed.

JMO

 

[wendy44]

Correct. The prosecution did not have unknown male DNA B, C or D run through CODIS or tested to the point of doing IGG on them to determine who they were from. BT said they did not run them against CODIS in an early hearing as they didn't meet the requirements. Not sure if this mixture under MM's nail is unknown male DNA C or if the blood on the sheath which was also a mixture was unknown male DNA C or if these are unknown DNA mixtures outside of unknown male DNA, B, C or D. Unknown male DNA B is a bloodstain on the bannister between the 2nd and first floor, allegedly a mixture per AT's question to Rylene Nowlin (she didn't remember if it was a mixture or not.) Unknown male DNA D is blood from inside the gloves collected by CSI on Nov. 20, 2022 during their search of the yard. We don't know for certain what Unknown Male C is other than that it was found inside 1122. And now we have yet another unknown mixture under MM's fingernail.

This was not correct. The poster asked:

If I understand correctly, the defense insists on the DNAs found under MM’s fingernails tested, and the prosecution doesn’t think it is necessary?

It's not correct that the prosecution found it unnecessary to have the DNA under MM's fingernails tested. According to MIL#5, there were at least 5 people tested by ISL against the DNA found under her fingernails--BK and 4 others whose LR was inconclusive (if Lab Report #7 refers to another individual, then at least 5 people plus BK were tested). We don't know how many were tested that were outright excluded--probably many more.

The lab reported a series of LR's for Item 13.1 including an LR of 0.399 for [Redacted] 0.485 for [Redacted], 0.20 for [Redacted], 0.0233 for [Redacted]. Lab Report #7, at 3.

The prosecution clearly thought it was necessary to test the DNA under MM's fingernails and did do that. Additionally, the defense was able to do their own independent testing and says their testing shows he was excluded from being a contributor.
JMO

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022425-Motion-inLimine5-RE-Inconclusive-Data.pdf

 

[lec_gn]

DM didn't say 'terrified', she said she was 'freaked out'. That's a big difference to me. I don't think she had a clue and was genuinely confused. We know she thought Kaylee might have been playing with the dog. Maddie and Kaylee had been texting Kaylee's former boyfriend, maybe she thought he showed up.

When living in my off campus housing during College, there was a basic rule. You don't just call 911 (snitch in the young ones eyes), that's an unwritten code for these life inexperienced young adults and probably still is today I'd imagine, especially if you're not actually seeing a murder or violence being committed.

DM was confused and didn't call 911 IMO 1) Because she didn't know what was truly happening if anything 2) She wouldn't want the police showing up if someone had a late night booty call or something silly and risk her friends getting upset with her. That would have been a logical thing for her to think, just as it would have been if I'd have been in the same situation.

A quadruple murder wasn't on her list of possibilities for the night that's for sure. I'm sure she is emotionally tormented over the whole situation and will be for the rest of her life.

JMO

Is there a definitive source for DM and/or BF's ages? I've seen several reported, but given they graduated high school in 2021, IMO they were most likely 19 or 20.

If so, the fact that DM was drunk as she ultimately reported to the police, being underage (US legal drinking age is 21) adds one more psychological barrier to calling 911, in addition to the many already pointed out in this thread. IMO totally understandable behavior, even if not "rational" per se.

JMO

 

[Charlot123]

You can't run IGG on items you do not reasonably believe to be connected to the offender.

They knew the DNA on the sheath almost certainly belonged to the killer, and they went with that. It was unquestionably their best evidence.

We have no idea what was done in regards to testing with those other samples.

You can’t say that the DNA on the sheath almost certainly belongs to the offender and not test DNA under the nail beds. If they find BK’s DNA there, all the better. More proof. If they find DNA of BK and another male, well, maybe it was a combined attack? But not involving IGG there…sorry, I would like to have a better explanation. Why?

Remember we are at the point where people have legit concerns about using My Heritage. It is not a US company, period. The only way it will be “ah, ok” is if it is an airtight case.

 

[MassGuy]

You can’t say that the DNA on the sheath almost certainly belongs to the offender and not test DNA under the nail beds. If they find BK’s DNA there, all the better. More proof. If they find DNA of BK and another male, well, maybe it was a combined attack? But not involving IGG there…sorry, I would like to have a better explanation. Why?

Remember we are at the point where people have legit concerns about using My Heritage. It is not a US company, period. The only way it will be “ah, ok” is if it is an airtight case.

There is no evidence they didn't test DNA under their nail beds. Of course that would be done if it had the possibility of identifying the offender. We also don't know the quality of this DNA, and how mixtures affected it.

Again, you cannot perform IGG on samples that are unlikely to belong to the killer. You can't complain about government overreach by using sites that have policy against law enforcement IGG, and then ask them to do something as egregious as using the IGG process to identify an innocent person, turn them into a murder suspect, ruin their life, and then get yourself sued to oblivion.

I mean you could, but that would be quite silly.

 

[gremlin444]

There is no evidence they didn't test DNA under their nail beds. Of course that would be done if it had the possibility of identifying the offender. We also don't know the quality of this DNA, and how mixtures affected it.

Again, you cannot perform IGG on samples that are unlikely to belong to the killer. You can't complain about government overreach by using sites that have policy against IGG, and then ask them to do something as egregious as using the IGG process to identify an innocent person, turn them into a murder suspect, ruin their life, and then get yourself sued to oblivion.

I mean you could, but that would be quite silly.

Not to mention, they can tell the difference between "oh, look, what we got from under nails is scratched off skin from another person" (both in quantity of cells and by actually being able to see the scraped out sample) compared to "this dna amount is tiny enough and doesn't show evidence of being in enough quantity to be from scratching someone" (so, it's just the kind that is picked up by touching items/people in passing).

 

[Balthazar]

This was not correct. The poster asked:

If I understand correctly, the defense insists on the DNAs found under MM’s fingernails tested, and the prosecution doesn’t think it is necessary?

It's not correct that the prosecution found it unnecessary to have the DNA under MM's fingernails tested. According to MIL#5, there were at least 5 people tested by ISL against the DNA found under her fingernails--BK and 4 others whose LR was inconclusive (if Lab Report #7 refers to another individual, then at least 5 people plus BK were tested). We don't know how many were tested that were outright excluded--probably many more.

The lab reported a series of LR's for Item 13.1 including an LR of 0.399 for [Redacted] 0.485 for [Redacted], 0.20 for [Redacted], 0.0233 for [Redacted]. Lab Report #7, at 3.

The prosecution clearly thought it was necessary to test the DNA under MM's fingernails and did do that. Additionally, the defense was able to do their own independent testing and says their testing shows he was excluded from being a contributor.
JMO

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022425-Motion-inLimine5-RE-Inconclusive-Data.pdf

The prosecution did partial testing only. They did NOT do IGG on the DNA found under MM's nail. So this was not conclusive or complete testing of this evidence at all. At most it could be described as partial testing.

 

[MassGuy]

The prosecution did partial testing only. They did NOT do IGG on the DNA found under MM's nail. So this was not conclusive or complete testing of this evidence at all. At most it could be described as partial testing.

We don't know if that DNA was male. We don't know if it could even be put into a database. IGG is an absolute nonstarter unless there's evidence it's potentially connected to the killer. You're asking for things to be done that have never been done in history, because they violate protocol, and have potential legal repercussions.

You're drawing a firm conclusion based on very limited evidence.

 

[Charlot123]

We don't know if that DNA was male. We don't know if it could even be put into a database. IGG is an absolute nonstarter unless there's evidence it's potentially connected to the killer. You're asking for things to be done that have never been done in history, because they violate protocol, and have potential legal repercussions.

You're drawing a firm conclusion based on very limited evidence.

Anything can be tested. It is another thing how do they explain the results. To remember another case, “oh, touch DNA doesn’t matter, lots of clothes hanging next to one another, it can even be transferred”, and here, “we have touch DNA on a shield lying on a bed. We nailed him”. (No pun intended). So whatever exists but wasn’t tested or maybe tested but deemed irrelevant raises a lot of questions.

 

[Oregonmama]

The evidence in this case is overwhelming for a guilty verdict, IMO. The defense is doing what good .defense lawyers do, and that's throwing every motion they can up to delay and stall. Hoping justice is served soon this summer.

 

[MassGuy]

Anything can be tested. It is another thing how do they explain the results. To remember another case, “oh, touch DNA doesn’t matter, lots of clothes hanging next to one another, it can even be transferred”, and here, “we have touch DNA on a shield lying on a bed. We nailed him”. (No pun intended). So whatever exists but wasn’t tested or maybe tested but deemed irrelevant raises a lot of questions.

That touch DNA didn’t have that kind of transfer possibility. He had no connection to the victims, and the DNA wasn’t merely on the sheath.

It was on the inside of a protected portion, and the killer absolutely would have had to have not only touched that, but applied pressure in doing so. This is why the lab expert concluded it was likely direct transfer, as there was so much of it.

If it’s not him, then things should fall apart. Here they got much stronger (car, movements, cell phone activity, his background, etc).

You can calculate the odds of all these things occurring simultaneously and them being a coincidence through certain programs.

The math says you’re talking about a minuscule fraction of a percent chance he’s not guilty. That doesn’t even factor in all the evidence we are not privy to.

Every single thing fits.

We’ve already seen the defense willingness to do their own testing, but as we’ve seen time and time again, unanswered questions suit their interests.

 

[Boxer]

Anything can be tested. It is another thing how do they explain the results. To remember another case, “oh, touch DNA doesn’t matter, lots of clothes hanging next to one another, it can even be transferred”, and here, “we have touch DNA on a shield lying on a bed. We nailed him”. (No pun intended). So whatever exists but wasn’t tested or maybe tested but deemed irrelevant raises a lot of questions.

Clothes next to each other or borrowing a sweatshirt seem a lot different than finding DNA on a high touch area of a knife sheath.

I found a Mark 2 from WW2 ( Navy's Kabar) in great uncles stuff, he was a Marine. No wonder he had hidden under all the other memorabilia and a lot of stuff.
These knives practically speak their purpose "I was made to kill people."

 

[Rolypolyoly]

I wonder if the timeline will be successfully reverse engineered. And how accurate DM's recall, what she heard and in what order.

I still have a question about MM's door. Why wasn't it locked? Or was it? Or was it propped open? Or was KG awake? Did she go investigate whatever disturbed Murphy? Murphy might have been responding to danger and KG was trying to quiet him for the sleeping roommates' benefits. She could have looked out a window and seen the Door Dash driver/vehicle or BK, quickly darted back to wake MM, "there's someone there" and BK got his foot in the door... MM still wouldn't have had time to react and KG would have been fighting for her life, with nowhere to go, cornered by the bed itself.

If everybody had been asleep, would everyone have been asleep behind locked doors? Would BK have made entry? Weird series of seemingly random event, misfortunes, that resulted in this massacre?

How did he expect to get through those doors? And was he aware of the challenges?

He wasn't there to steal IMO.

He vane prepared. For murder.

JMO

I'm way behind, son please forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but maybe it's as simple as they only locked their doors when they weren't in their rooms?

 

[Charlot123]

That touch DNA didn’t have that kind of transfer possibility. He had no connection to the victims, and the DNA wasn’t merely on the sheath.

It was on the inside of a protected portion, and the killer absolutely would have had to have not only touched that, but applied pressure in doing so. This is why the lab expert concluded it was likely direct transfer, as there was so much of it.

If it’s not him, then things should fall apart. Here they got much stronger (car, movements, cell phone activity, his background, etc).

You can calculate the odds of all these things occurring simultaneously and them being a coincidence through certain programs.

The math says you’re talking about a minuscule fraction of a percent chance he’s not guilty. That doesn’t even factor in all the evidence we are not privy to.

Every single thing fits.

We’ve already seen the defense willingness to do their own testing, but as we’ve seen time and time again, unanswered questions suit their interests.

The odds of independent probabilities, yes. But the initial assumption that they are independent might be a mistake.

(We are discussing it in another case. SIDS syndrome deaths. People served years because of idiotic trial expert).

If some probabilities are connected, then the odds are much higher.

For example: BK was driving to Moscow occasionally for “his good of choice” because as he said shopping was better there. Maybe he used on the spot or even in the car so when he was sleeping, someone could have stolen his sheath. The murderers placed it intentionally on the bed as they were habitual visitors and their DNA being in the house could be explained. Maybe they lived close by, but it is a university city and a party house, so everything is rather close. Given that BK was a TA, he’d switch off his phone when driving to buy stuff. When he came home, he continued to use, but didn’t want his parents to know so he put his stuff into neighbors’ bins”.

See? If you calculate the chance as 1/n x 1/z x 1/p etc etc it is really super-low.

But that applies only if the probabilities are independent. If they are connected, which could be the case, the chance of these things happening simultaneously is way higher.