4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #90

[Cindizzi]

https://x.com/uidaho/status/1724080046279663844?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

 

[arielilane]

I will continue to do whatever I can to honor your name and keep your spirit alive. We must never forget.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724116874928230645

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Sad anniversary
Ethan Xana Kaylee Madison

Very sad. I'd also add BF and DM. Today must be hellish for them. I hope they have all the support they need.

 

[Justice101]

Those two people will have hard enough time dealing with the (false) guilt they have...let alone know that everyone who knows who they are looking at them. They probably want nothing else other than to fade into the background.

Those poor young women.

 

[arielilane]

Employees have a memorial outside the Mad Greek restaurant where Maddie Mogen and Xana Kernodle worked.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724157055949476317

 

[Cindizzi]

https://x.com/kfixler/status/1724150759770730875?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/northwest/idaho/article281508688.html

 

[arielilane]

It’s been one year since four University of Idaho students were killed at an off-campus home. Here’s where the case against accused killer Bryan Kohberger stands. @brianentin reports. Full story: https://trib.al/R2VBENF

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724198278290452861

 

[Cindizzi]

https://x.com/idahopubradio/status/1724197409742274767?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

 

[Cindizzi]

https://x.com/dugganreports/status/1724237513428992168?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

 

[Balthazar]

@Balthazar, you raise some interesting questions, and I think they're worthy of discussion and shouldn't be laughed at. A lot of people have raised these issues. But in spite of my doubts and worries, I am not ready to discard my impression that BK did it. I'm still at around 75% it's him.
Mainly because:
1) the presence of BK's DNA on the sheath. IMO, to consider that this was "planted" or got on it accidentally, would require a fantastic coincidence for the other parameters to also coincide: BK happening to also drive a white Elantra and his phone being off at the time of the crimes. BK would have to be the unluckiest guy in the world.
2) The involvement of the FBI. Yes, crooked cops do exist. But the FBI isn't affected by UofI's financial interests, or any of the sort of things that might hypothetically cause small town police corruption. If the FBI had discovered anything came from foul play, it would have been flagged. If the FBI had uncovered any truly exculpatory evidence, I am sure they would have alerted the prosecution that they have the wrong guy. The FBI doesn't have any vested interest in seeing the wrong person convicted in this case. If they had found any indication that someone else did it, they would be after that person.
On another note, you brought up the Brady/Giglio material. AFAIK (please correct me if I am wrong), Gary Tolleson was only peripherally involved in the investigation, and was not the one who interrogated BK (I believe that was Payne), or had any role in finding or processing the knife sheath (Payne again). I can't find any official mention of Tolleson's involvement other than being present at the autopsies (mentioned by the defense in their 2nd motion to compel). I would think Tolleson would have been mostly kept away from the core of the investigation in order to prevent precisely the kind of suspicions his involvement might create. At least I would HOPE so!
That being said, the more time passes and the more I get the feeling the prosecution (and media) has made it seem like this is an easy win, when it might not be. I have also been less than impressed with their little game of hide the ball in discovery matters, and I find Bill Thompson has come across as a little disingenuous saying "we can hand over something that doesn't exist" regarding the IGG material, only to end up having to hand it over months later, because it does exist.
MOO.

I feel much the same as you, but Thompson's behavior regarding the DNA is making me completely and totally doubt the veracity of the DNA, especially in regards to the chain of custody. There should be no reason not to share the chain of custody document and complete documentation of the processing of the DNA and how the IGG was done with the defense. In fact, of all the evidence in this case, this DNA evidence, because it is based on verifiable scientific processes done in labs, in a controlled environment, should be the evidence the prosecution is the least concerned about sharing with the defense - unless the prosecutor knows something is wrong with it. To me, it looks like Thompson is absolutely desperate to hide this DNA information from the defense and is having to be dragged kicking and screaming through the court process in order to surrender it to the defense. He even claimed the documentation of the IGG process doesn't exist in court and in front of a judge and then it has turned out that was not true. Which begs the question why??? Why is he behaving like this???

We don't have access to any of the reports or discovery, so we can only go on what is in the media so far.

We see Howard Blum wrote that they only found 20 skin cells or less when at least 80 are usually needed to get an STR. We also know some cells will be destroyed during the testing - 20% to 80% of the cells are destroyed.

"Currently, the optimum DNA input to the PCR for STR profiling is around 500 pg [[1], [2], [3]], which equates to approximately 80 diploid cells (∼6 pg/cell [4]). If the potential of DNA loss through workflow processing is not considered, any item from which 80 cells are collected should generate a full DNA profile. Due to inefficient collection of the DNA template present by swabbing or tapelifting techniques and the loss of DNA through standard extraction methods, reported to range between 20 %–80 % [5,6], far more than 80 diploid cells would need to be collected to ensure a full profile downstream given the optimum template stated [[1], [2], [3]]."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1872497320302258#:~:text=Currently%2C%20the%20optimum%20DNA%20input,generate%20a%20full%20DNA%20profile.

Even if the newest STR process was used that can be done on 5 cells, if the sample was 20 cells and then 80% of those cells were destroyed that leaves only 2 cells.

Was Blum right about the 20 cells or less? That begs the question, was the DNA STR profile from the Idaho crime lab partial? Is it possible that the Texas lab couldn't run the IGG because the sample was partial so the FBI lab took over? Could this be why the Texas lab's datafile is much smaller than that of the FBI? And even more concerning, is this why the prosecutor has been fighting against the defense seeing the DNA evidence?

We don't know the answers to any of the above questions, but they are reasonable to ask given that the prosecutor has been trying to do all he can to keep the DNA evidence and DNA evidence chain of custody from the defense.

All JMO, IMOO.

 

[ShadyLady]

Quick question, will BK's posting on ...was it redit? be allowed. The subject of his studies?

 

[maconrich]

Quick question, will BK's posting on ...was it redit? be allowed. The subject of his studies?

INAL, but since it's in the PCA, I'd be inclined to think they will try

 

[Boxer]

I feel much the same as you, but Thompson's behavior regarding the DNA is making me completely and totally doubt the veracity of the DNA, especially in regards to the chain of custody. There should be no reason not to share the chain of custody document and complete documentation of the processing of the DNA and how the IGG was done with the defense. In fact, of all the evidence in this case, this DNA evidence, because it is based on verifiable scientific processes done in labs, in a controlled environment, should be the evidence the prosecution is the least concerned about sharing with the defense - unless the prosecutor knows something is wrong with it. To me, it looks like Thompson is absolutely desperate to hide this DNA information from the defense and is having to be dragged kicking and screaming through the court process in order to surrender it to the defense. He even claimed the documentation of the IGG process doesn't exist in court and in front of a judge and then it has turned out that was not true. Which begs the question why??? Why is he behaving like this???

We don't have access to any of the reports or discovery, so we can only go on what is in the media so far.

We see Howard Blum wrote that they only found 20 skin cells or less when at least 80 are usually needed to get an STR. We also know some cells will be destroyed during the testing - 20% to 80% of the cells are destroyed.

"Currently, the optimum DNA input to the PCR for STR profiling is around 500 pg [[1], [2], [3]], which equates to approximately 80 diploid cells (∼6 pg/cell [4]). If the potential of DNA loss through workflow processing is not considered, any item from which 80 cells are collected should generate a full DNA profile. Due to inefficient collection of the DNA template present by swabbing or tapelifting techniques and the loss of DNA through standard extraction methods, reported to range between 20 %–80 % [5,6], far more than 80 diploid cells would need to be collected to ensure a full profile downstream given the optimum template stated [[1], [2], [3]]."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1872497320302258#:~:text=Currently%2C%20the%20optimum%20DNA%20input,generate%20a%20full%20DNA%20profile.

Even if the newest STR process was used that can be done on 5 cells, if the sample was 20 cells and then 80% of those cells were destroyed that leaves only 2 cells.

Was Blum right about the 20 cells or less? That begs the question, was the DNA STR profile from the Idaho crime lab partial? Is it possible that the Texas lab couldn't run the IGG because the sample was partial so the FBI lab took over? Could this be why the Texas lab's datafile is much smaller than that of the FBI? And even more concerning, is this why the prosecutor has been fighting against the defense seeing the DNA evidence?

We don't know the answers to any of the above questions, but they are reasonable to ask given that the prosecutor has been trying to do all he can to keep the DNA evidence and DNA evidence chain of custody from the defense.

All JMO, IMOO.

What questions?
They had DNA and it went through successive established processes.

 

[10ofRods]

I feel much the same as you, but Thompson's behavior regarding the DNA is making me completely and totally doubt the veracity of the DNA, especially in regards to the chain of custody. There should be no reason not to share the chain of custody document and complete documentation of the processing of the DNA and how the IGG was done with the defense. In fact, of all the evidence in this case, this DNA evidence, because it is based on verifiable scientific processes done in labs, in a controlled environment, should be the evidence the prosecution is the least concerned about sharing with the defense - unless the prosecutor knows something is wrong with it. To me, it looks like Thompson is absolutely desperate to hide this DNA information from the defense and is having to be dragged kicking and screaming through the court process in order to surrender it to the defense. He even claimed the documentation of the IGG process doesn't exist in court and in front of a judge and then it has turned out that was not true. Which begs the question why??? Why is he behaving like this???

We don't have access to any of the reports or discovery, so we can only go on what is in the media so far.

We see Howard Blum wrote that they only found 20 skin cells or less when at least 80 are usually needed to get an STR. We also know some cells will be destroyed during the testing - 20% to 80% of the cells are destroyed.

"Currently, the optimum DNA input to the PCR for STR profiling is around 500 pg [[1], [2], [3]], which equates to approximately 80 diploid cells (∼6 pg/cell [4]). If the potential of DNA loss through workflow processing is not considered, any item from which 80 cells are collected should generate a full DNA profile. Due to inefficient collection of the DNA template present by swabbing or tapelifting techniques and the loss of DNA through standard extraction methods, reported to range between 20 %–80 % [5,6], far more than 80 diploid cells would need to be collected to ensure a full profile downstream given the optimum template stated [[1], [2], [3]]."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1872497320302258#:~:text=Currently%2C%20the%20optimum%20DNA%20input,generate%20a%20full%20DNA%20profile.

Even if the newest STR process was used that can be done on 5 cells, if the sample was 20 cells and then 80% of those cells were destroyed that leaves only 2 cells.

Was Blum right about the 20 cells or less? That begs the question, was the DNA STR profile from the Idaho crime lab partial? Is it possible that the Texas lab couldn't run the IGG because the sample was partial so the FBI lab took over? Could this be why the Texas lab's datafile is much smaller than that of the FBI? And even more concerning, is this why the prosecutor has been fighting against the defense seeing the DNA evidence?

We don't know the answers to any of the above questions, but they are reasonable to ask given that the prosecutor has been trying to do all he can to keep the DNA evidence and DNA evidence chain of custody from the defense.

All JMO, IMOO.

So, basically, you think the lab lied when it said it had a profile from one individual. That means only one thing in science. Which is that they had an actual profile, not a partial.

Where are you finding that they had the FBI process the STR report again? They never sent that sheath to the FBI, IMO - but let's start there.

What's your evidence/link for the actual sheath being retested anywhere (Othram or FBI). That's huge news if you have a link and I'm sure we would all like to see it.

TIA.

 

[10ofRods]

Quick question, will BK's posting on ...was it redit? be allowed. The subject of his studies?

I would certainly think so. Reddit stores IP addresses for every member/user. One piece of advice given out by lawyers on /r/legaladvice is NOT TO POST ON REDDIT thinking that you can remain undetected by LE.

Indeed, had some hapless criminals responded to BK's request for info, they would have also been easily tracked, which is why it's likely almost no one responded. Which led to him being unable to complete his research design (a master's thesis is a test of effective research design in social science).

It's odd to me that his professor ever thought this was a good plan/approved its use. He would have been better off to do the tedious but scientifically rewarding task of contacting prison administrators and asking if he could speak with a few prisoners about this topic, then he'd also have to write them through the prison system and he could interview them by mail. All it takes is getting an administrator's okay to correspond in this manner with a prisoner.

Or, if he wanted only past criminals who had completed their time, he could use parole board documents, email parole officers or even hang out in the lobby where the parolees have to go (counties usually have at least one facility).

The sloppiness of a reddit-based research protocol is that one would have absolutely no certainty that the person was, in fact, someone who had committed a crime. Tons of creative writers on Reddit. Not a good research tool. Would never have been allowed in any program I've been in or taught in. Undergrad (first couple of years, sure but master's theses should be of publishable level in the subject at hand).

IMO

 

[Chloegirl]

Idaho college killings: Remembering victims one year later

A vigil was Monday evening to remember the four University of Idaho students.

www.newsnationnow.com

They seem to be dedicating most of the Banfield hour to the Idaho4 1-year anniversary, UIdaho student-led vigil and interviews with the victim's families.

 

[gremlin444]

We see Howard Blum wrote that they only found 20 skin cells or less when at least 80 are usually needed to get an STR. We also know some cells will be destroyed during the testing - 20% to 80% of the cells are destroyed.

"Currently, the optimum DNA input to the PCR for STR profiling is around 500 pg [[1], [2], [3]], which equates to approximately 80 diploid cells (∼6 pg/cell [4]). If the potential of DNA loss through workflow processing is not considered, any item from which 80 cells are collected should generate a full DNA profile. Due to inefficient collection of the DNA template present by swabbing or tapelifting techniques and the loss of DNA through standard extraction methods, reported to range between 20 %–80 % [5,6], far more than 80 diploid cells would need to be collected to ensure a full profile downstream given the optimum template stated [[1], [2], [3]]."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1872497320302258#:~:text=Currently%2C%20the%20optimum%20DNA%20input,generate%20a%20full%20DNA%20profile.

Even if the newest STR process was used that can be done on 5 cells, if the sample was 20 cells and then 80% of those cells were destroyed that leaves only 2 cells.

Was Blum right about the 20 cells or less? That begs the question, was the DNA STR profile from the Idaho crime lab partial? Is it possible that the Texas lab couldn't run the IGG because the sample was partial so the FBI lab took over? Could this be why the Texas lab's datafile is much smaller than that of the FBI? And even more concerning, is this why the prosecutor has been fighting against the defense seeing the DNA evidence?

We don't know the answers to any of the above questions, but they are reasonable to ask given that the prosecutor has been trying to do all he can to keep the DNA evidence and DNA evidence chain of custody from the defense.

All JMO, IMOO.

Howard Blum has stated many incorrect things about the DNA, including claiming that the ISP lab couldn't find any DNA and that the private Texas lab had to find it. That claim is disproven by the fact that both the prosecution AND the defense state as fact in court filings that ISP found the DNA and created the STR. I post links to the documents and quote them in this post:

4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #90

That video at Albertson's is one of the most damning pieces of evidence against BK. It ties the cellular and video evidence from the night before together in a nice bow and leaves little doubt. But no one ever talks about. Can you expand on this? It's an interesting idea. How would this be...

www.websleuths.com

 

[jepop]

We see Howard Blum wrote that they only found 20 skin cells or less when at least 80 are usually needed to get an STR. We also know some cells will be destroyed during the testing - 20% to 80% of the cells are destroyed.

RSBMFF

Even if the newest STR process was used that can be done on 5 cells, if the sample was 20 cells and then 80% of those cells were destroyed that leaves only 2 cells.


Was Blum right about the 20 cells or less?

RBBM:
"We see Howard Blum wrote that they only found 20 skin cells or less when at least 80 are usually needed to get an STR. We also know some cells will be destroyed during the testing - 20% to 80% of the cells are destroyed."

I would like to see a link to Blum where we can refresh ourselves as to the claims you highlight. Please provide the location within Blum's writings where he makes these claims so they can be assessed rationally within the context of his writings by readers of the thread. A number of posts have stated wrong facts recently - most noteably that ISL did not extract and do analysis of sheath dna - because this is what was reported by media on the basis of Blum's writings. It's important to assess Blum's credibility Imo and as you refer to him specifically I would like to see a relevant link that is accessible to readers. Moo

 

[Cindizzi]

https://x.com/idahopubradio/status/1724246603119411216?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

 

[Deleted member 718]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724281365238366609

@AmandaArdenNews
@CBSNews
Portland, OR