4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #87

[Jurisprudence]

Not sure the dad can raise an objection, as his DNA was found in trash. Trash has been ruled as searchable by higher courts. You don't get a say in what happens to the DNA you leave behind in the trash, in restaurants, in workplaces, the outside of your car, etc.

They can't come inside your house to get your DNA (or falsely arrest you just to get your DNA). But Dad cannot raise an objection over the taking of his DNA from the trash - he never sent anything to Othram that we know of, it was a more distant relative (and that person's identity, in my view, should remain protected).

IMO.

And, if it is true that BK was separating his trash to throw into the neighbor's bins, this shows BK knew this too. But, he never thought beyond the immediate. He never thought about the DNA of anyone else in his family being on the curb.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

Sounds like the defense is desperately relying upon that motion to dismiss the indictment. But I don't think the judge is going to dismiss. He already just said that he didn't find any irregularities in the Grand Jury proceedings.

So what are they basing this motion to dismiss on ?

The judge sounds pretty focused upon the October 2nd trial date. He doesn't seem to be planning to dismiss the indictment, IMO. AT better not put all her eggs in that basket. If she spends the next 12 days getting her presentation together for Sept 1st, and her motion is denied, yikes.

That leaves her just 30 days until start of the trial. Pressure is on.

I think he's going to split the baby. Even though the genetic genealogy information was never intended to be offered as evidence by the state I think he will make them hand it over just as a precaution. That's why the state said in their papers that they reserve the right to present this if this happens. But, they had no intention of doing this. They have his direct DNA match. So what will he do if she "fashions" an argument? Exclude the DNA completely? Bc imo those will be his 2 choices: exclude it or rule it harmless error.

Excluding the actual DNA match would be tragic imo.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

https://x.com/jordansmithkxly/status/1692684077151993988?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

View attachment 441801
View attachment 441803

Ohhhhhh he ruled that they have to provide more information on the non-alibi alibi? That's fantastic!

jmo

 

[BeachSky]

The SOEDDI Defense!

Like I said …It’s somebody else’s fault he left the knife sheath there.
He looked very serial killer today.
Clenching his jaw, too much hair gel…he’s losing it.
Bring it. Let’s get this guy convicted.

Moo

 

[jepop]

It's really, really fast for a case such as this one. Anne Taylor wrote in a reply a couple of weeks ago that this is Bryan Kohberger's decision about speedy trial and it's his decision to make.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1692685722682060896

I'm sure I've seen posts from a few saying they'll eat their hats if this case goes to trial in October. Could be time to start marinating whichever hats they plan to consume!

 

[Balthazar]

Um. Things did not work out for Ted Bundy because he killed dozens of women. Not because he spoke to LE.

Speaking to LE did NOT help him and, in fact, made things far worse for him.

 

[MassGuy]

I always appreciate how well you state things. It's really simple. We (general we) try to complicate things. Defense attorneys are paid to complicate and confuse things, but that doesn't mean there is any merit to the things they come up with.

I’m not a lawyer. But these are the arguments I’d make.I’d like to feel I could fool people. His lawyers clearly are. It’s sad.

 

[katydid23]

Like I said …It’s somebody else’s fault he left the knife sheath there.
He looked very serial killer today.
Clenching his jaw, too much hair gel…he’s losing it.
Bring it. Let’s get this guy convicted.

Moo

I thought he looked extra creepy today---especially when he smiled as he entered. He seemed smug. JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

My first thought was that, for Kohberger, that's more than a faint smile, it's one of the biggest smiles he's given since these proceedings began. Even his eyes are warmed up a little - although to me it looks as if he's looking over the head of the prosecutor and directly into the camera. IOW, looks like smiling for the camera.

Lots of people never smile much more than that, he looks almost happy, to me.

Obviously, JMO.

MSN

 

[10ofRods]

And, if it is true that BK was separating his trash to throw into the neighbor's bins, this shows BK knew this too. But, he never thought beyond the immediate. He never thought about the DNA of anyone else in his family being on the curb.

jmo

Or if he did think of it, he thought of it far too late. I believe he didn't anticipate forgetting the sheath.

Also, he wasn't yet at home in PA when LE took that trash, so short of cluing his parents into his situation, there was little he could do to prevent it.

I bet he thought about it after things unfolded as they did. Knew it was only a matter of time. He sure looked calm in court for a guy in his situation.

IMO.

 

[LauraAnne]

He kind of reminds me of Kenneth McDuff, a prolific serial killer who was let out of prison from Death Row only to murder women again.

This photo especially, at the beginning of this video:

 

[jepop]

I think he's going to split the baby. Even though the genetic genealogy information was never intended to be offered as evidence by the state I think he will make them hand it over just as a precaution. That's why the state said in their papers that they reserve the right to present this if this happens. But, they had no intention of doing this. They have his direct DNA match. So what will he do if she "fashions" an argument? Exclude the DNA completely? Bc imo those will be his 2 choices: exclude it or rule it harmless error.

Excluding the actual DNA match would be tragic imo.

jmo

There's no way for the judge to exclude the sheath dna.Moo The str profile developed from the single source male dna extracted from the sheath in the Idaho State Lab matched BK through the dad's trash dna and then matched BK directly through his buccal swab. No dna test related to the IGG had any bearing on the PCA that ensured BK's arrest. Moo

No way to exclude it based on whatever the D comes up with if they get access to the IGG info. A private lab developed a separate snp profile from ISL forensic (str) sample and the fbi used that profile to undertake the IGG. The two processes of dna analysis - the two tests do not cross paths. Cannot exclude the str test and the direct matches made from that. No grounds. Moo

 

[Jurisprudence]

I’m not a lawyer. But these are the arguments I’d make.I’d like to feel I could fool people. His lawyers clearly are. It’s sad.

Agree. And, I think they know due to the seriousness of the case that the judge will indulge them and they are exploiting this for all it's worth unfortunately

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

<modsnip - referenced post was removed for copyright>

Another new suit too. So Idaho purchased him a black one and a gray one. Nice. MOO - Most defendants in his position appear in court in prison orange until trial - especially for motion hearings, arraignments, etc. Another indulgence that the judge likely didn't want to deal with hearing on argument later bc I can hear the argument to the appellate court "I understand that by law he doesn't have a right to be dressed in civilian clothes. However, these motion hearings were televised and it was prejudicial for the judge to make my client appear in prison orange"

It's not prejudicial for any other defendant around the country whose hearings were broadcast on Court TV or Law & Crime. But it's prejudicial to BK.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

View attachment 441820

MSN

I cannot fathom what this guy could possibly be grinning from ear to ear over. I see this picture and I think of the families who were present and my heart aches for them. This is not tone deaf. It's arrogance. I hope every potential jury member sees this.

jmo

 

[schooling]

Agree. And, I think they know due to the seriousness of the case that the judge will indulge them and they are exploiting this for all it's worth unfortunately

jmo

The judge seems like he’s done with the filibustering.

 

[Jurisprudence]

State's counterargument: "This information is not in the possession or control of the prosecuting attorney," and therefore cannot provide what it doesn't have. Says it's possible the FBI has it. But the State does not. State says FBI told them these things exist, but the state does not have it. The state says it is also trying to protect the innocent civilians that are also listed within the comprehensive database. "Why take that risk for something that is not relevant to the trial?"

[snipped by me]

I agree. They (the state) were never going to offer it as evidence. It was merely an investigative tool. I'm trying to figure out what the defense is going for here. It looks like they are in search of a Hail Mary. But if we think this through, unless the Judge tosses the direct DNA and sheath (and if he does that the state is in trouble) what is it they seek to gain? Confuse the jury? Hope to plant a seed in the jury's mind that the FBI was incompetent or that they (and Idaho LE) corruptly framed him?

On the other hand, if they twist the data to to argue there was a flaw in the family tree then what? Do they really plan to claim that BK could have been exonerated if only they had tested Uncle Harry from Liverpool?

jmo

 

[Sundog]

Ohhhhhh he ruled that they have to provide more information on the non-alibi alibi? That's fantastic!

jmo

My understanding is that the judge indicated that they have to provide more information IF they want to call witnesses to testify to the alibi.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Or if he did think of it, he thought of it far too late. I believe he didn't anticipate forgetting the sheath.

Also, he wasn't yet at home in PA when LE took that trash, so short of cluing his parents into his situation, there was little he could do to prevent it.

I bet he thought about it after things unfolded as they did. Knew it was only a matter of time. He sure looked calm in court for a guy in his situation.

IMO.

Agree.

On PA he was in PA for sure. Well, I'm pretty sure, wasn't he (lol)? They were surveilling him IIRC.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

My understanding is that the judge indicated that they have to provide more information IF they want to call witnesses to testify to the alibi.

Oh, thanks. That's a little bit different esp considering they said they would do the bulk on cross. Did they also say they planned to call a state witness if the state would not call him? I can't remember. But, if so, then they have to produce the information (as they should imo).

jmo