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

[Swansee]

@10ofRods
The claim about the whole sheath being sent to Othram was made by Howard Blum in one of his articles on the Idaho 4, and he reiterated it during his Newsnation interview which I linked a few posts ago. However as @gremlin444 and @jepop have noted since, that claim appears to be in direct contradiction with some of the court documents.

 

[Balthazar]

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.

Show me the report that says the lab says they had a complete DNA profile.

I didn't say the FBI processed the STR. They did the IGG for some reason instead of the lab in Texas.

I didn't say anything at all about the sheath being sent anywhere. I assume it was at the Idaho crime lab and remained in Idaho.

 

[Balthazar]

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.

One individual could mean a partial profile from one individual or a complete profile from one individual. I have not seen any document from the Idaho Crime lab that said they had a complete profile of one individual. If you have that, please link it here.

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.

I don't know what you are talking about in regards to the sheath. Are you trying to derail the conversation? The sheath is not even a part of my comment.

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.

?????????????

 

[Balthazar]

RSBMFF


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

It was written in Eyes of a Killer Part IV. However, it is behind a paywall. <modsnip: quoting paywalled article>

You may be able to find the complete read along on Youtube or some other source if you don't subscribe to Airmail.

 

[Cindizzi]

https://x.com/woodcockkay1/status/1724197398438646169?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

 

[wendy44]

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.

Are you referring to the last hearing? The defense asked for materials produced by the FBI and private lab that did the IGG. There's no DNA processing involved in IGG. They're just provided a DNA profile. People are doing IGG on ancestry/23&Me/GEDMatch every day and no one is processing DNA.

IMO, it's likely the FBI is resisting. They consider it an investigative tool/method and don't feel it's subject to discovery. The "chain of custody" being referred to by the prosecution is not about the chain of custody of the actual DNA evidence. They're asking to protect the raw data produced by the profile (and again, anyone with a DNA profile on a commercial service can download their own raw data, they're not processing anything) and the procedures the labs used to generate the lead--"The raw data related to the SNP profile and the underlying laboratory documentation related to the development of the profile, such as chain of custody forms, laboratory standard operating procedures, analysts notes, etc."

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/102523-Order-Addressing-IGG-DNA.pdf

This does not say that the prosecutor wants to keep the DNA evidence and the chain of custody of the DNA evidence from the defense. And in this motion the defense is only asking for information related to the use of IGG. They're looking for a procedural error. They're not questioning the retrieval/processing/matching of the actual DNA on the sheath. At least not here where you're referring to "chain of custody" so maybe you have a link to something else?

JMO

 

[Balthazar]

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

I agree Blum has gotten some facts wrong. However, he has also gotten some facts right. So we don't know for sure either way. If Blum is right about the DNA only being comprised of 20 cells, then it is unlikely they ever had a complete DNA profile, IMO.

 

[iamshadow21]

https://x.com/woodcockkay1/status/1724197398438646169?s=61&t=Vp-AZ81ShrhzLNqqCFHAgA

View attachment 460741

It touches my heart that Kay, who has had her own hard road of heartache to travel for years, is thinking of Ethan, Kaylee, Maddie, and Xana today, as we all are.

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724316994457968737

 

[schooling]

I agree Blum has gotten some facts wrong. However, he has also gotten some facts right. So we don't know for sure either way. If Blum is right about the DNA only being comprised of 20 cells, then it is unlikely they ever had a complete DNA profile, IMO.

Logic says he’s wrong. MOO

It was written in Eyes of a Killer Part IV. However, it is behind a paywall. This is what it says:

" In total, according to knowledgeable sources, about 20 cells. Maybe, they whispered, even fewer. "

You may be able to find the complete read along on Youtube or some other source if you don't subscribe to Airmail.

The CODIS threshold is 1 in 10 million rarity for sample submission

CODIS and NDIS Fact Sheet | Federal Bureau of Investigation

A compilation of frequently-asked questions about the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) and the National DNA Index System (NDIS).

www.fbi.gov

If we were to entertain Blum’s “whispers” and assume that LE didn’t get to a full profile BUT still managed to get north of the CODIS threshold…

Isn’t 1 in 10 million (still compelling IMO) quite a stretch to 1 in 5 octillion? That’s quite a lot of zeros away from a simple calculation error. I’d say that even a number in between is gross negligence. IMO. Would we even call something like that negligence? Maybe prosecutorial misconduct? It’s probably whatever’s after that…worse of the worst.

So how do you reason that if prosecutors didn’t mean full profile in the PCA (according to some) that they subsequently went on record with an astronomical full profile like 1 in 5 octillion?

IMO there’s a reason the math isn’t mathing. It’s Blum and his whisperers.

Simply put, IMO the 1 in 5 octillion rarity number backs up the generally accepted interpretation of the PCA and a full profile.

MOO

 

[Seattle1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724347444215926930

 

[jepop]

It was written in Eyes of a Killer Part IV. However, it is behind a paywall. <modsnip>

You may be able to find the complete read along on Youtube or some other source if you don't subscribe to Airmail.

<modsnip: moderating>
Imo, all court docs point towards ISL processing a full str profile that qualified for CODIS (ref State's motion and reply for Protective Order for IGG). @10ofRods made this point and I agree. In neither documents or the latest Nov 2nd hearing has the D questioned the str profiling. Moo

As to the size of the data files as asserted by A.Taylor in Nov 2nd hearing, Imo any speculation this indicates that only a partial profile was found on the sheath is backed by no evidence whatsoever. D would not need to to take this convoluted path (through perceived/asserted data file sizes) to imply this. They could simply state as much in the hearing or in any of the motions/replies they have submitted re the IGG. Why? Because they have full access to ISL lab reports re the dna extraction and str results. And why, even if it was possible, would state choose to not disclose a partial str profile result? And jeopardise the case? I do not see your speculations as based on any feasible known facts or on any feasible possible facts. Ofcourse this is Moo.

And as to Blum's statement as a basis for this speculation: Blum obviously is not privy to the ISL lab reports in discovery - Imo it is more reasonable to question his reliability- despite his claim to "knowledgable sources" who "whisper" said info into his ear lol.. If his claims have any basis in reality, then he received illegally leaked information Moo and if so it could have been second or third hand, completely wrong or completely invented Moo. So, I am agreeing to disagree that Blum's unsupported assertions reasonably raise questions about the profiling results out of the ISL. Moo

As others have opined,and I agree with them, chain of custody is not relevant. FBI simply received already developed SNP profile from Othram as uploaded for puposes of IGG. Mr Thompson explained his understanding of that process on Nov 2nd and Imo there is no reason, no basis to speculate that he is being deceptive and trying to hide anything. Moo. For those who are interested in re-visiting the Nov 2nd hearing for themselves where Thompson explains his understanding:

 

[Charlot123]

I think you are missing the point. I'm not questioning the SNP profile. I'm curious about exactly WHAT is "altered" and HOW it is altered by the database software. In other words, HOW does the SNP data from the lab look BEFORE going into the database and once the database alters it to fit the requirements of their software what does it look like then? I'm not talking about the output, I'm talking about the machine language. What do you know about that?

A very interesting question about machine language/s. Don't know anything but never thought about it, either.

 

[katydid23]

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.

And they are going to be grilled and possibly vilified by the DT during the trial. JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

And they are going to be grilled and possibly vilified by the DT during the trial. JMO

I believe that would be a very, very bad mistake by the Defense. These girls have been through hell, they were/are blasted and scandalized on SM, followed and hounded by reporters, and on top of that are dealing with their own emotional trauma of having survived the brutal murder of their friends. It will be a lifelong road of dealing with this ahead for them.

Public sympathy for the girls is the majority, unless you listen to the few conspiracy theorists out there. I also don't think there will be anything the Defense can do to try and impeach or discredit their conduct that night.

DM opened her door to what she thought was ordinary noises (Kaylee's dog, voice maybe crying (lover quarrel?) she had no reason to ever entertain the thought that a brutal killer was in that house murdering her roommates. None, period.

She was probably more annoyed than anything, until after she saw BK exit and then did what many (including myself) roomies in a shared house would do - lock her door and go back to sleep.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

<modsnip: moderating>

Imo, all court docs point towards ISL processing a full str profile that qualified for CODIS (ref State's motion and reply for Protective Order for IGG). @10ofRods made this point and I agree. In neither documents or the latest Nov 2nd hearing has the D questioned the str profiling. Moo

As to the size of the data files as asserted by A.Taylor in Nov 2nd hearing, Imo any speculation this indicates that only a partial profile was found on the sheath is backed by no evidence whatsoever. D would not need to to take this convoluted path (through perceived/asserted data file sizes) to imply this. They could simply state as much in the hearing or in any of the motions/replies they have submitted re the IGG. Why? Because they have full access to ISL lab reports re the dna extraction and str results. And why, even if it was possible, would state choose to not disclose a partial str profile result? And jeopardise the case? I do not see your speculations as based on any feasible known facts or on any feasible possible facts. Ofcourse this is Moo.

And as to Blum's statement as a basis for this speculation: Blum obviously is not privy to the ISL lab reports in discovery - Imo it is more reasonable to question his reliability- despite his claim to "knowledgable sources" who "whisper" said info into his ear lol.. If his claims have any basis in reality, then he received illegally leaked information Moo and if so it could have been second or third hand, completely wrong or completely invented Moo. So, I am agreeing to disagree that Blum's unsupported assertions reasonably raise questions about the profiling results out of the ISL. Moo

As others have opined,and I agree with them, chain of custody is not relevant. FBI simply received already developed SNP profile from Othram as uploaded for puposes of IGG. Mr Thompson explained his understanding of that process on Nov 2nd and Imo there is no reason, no basis to speculate that he is being deceptive and trying to hide anything. Moo. For those who are interested in re-visiting the Nov 2nd hearing for themselves where Thompson explains his understanding:

BK was so smirky in this hearing, even if he tried to hide it. It made me nauseous, he thinks this is game.

IMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I agree Blum has gotten some facts wrong. However, he has also gotten some facts right. So we don't know for sure either way. If Blum is right about the DNA only being comprised of 20 cells, then it is unlikely they ever had a complete DNA profile, IMO.

A broken clock is right twice a day. Based on the stuff I've read by him, Blum is not credible to me.

JMO

 

[katydid23]

BK was so smirky in this hearing, even if he tried to hide it. It made me nauseous, he thinks this is game.

IMO

He looks that way in every hearing, IMO. He smirks, and looks very smug, like he is sure he will beat this.

Someone who was innocent and falsely accused of a quadruple murder, would not look so smug and pleased with himself, IMO. I think he'd be very worried and anxious, not arrogant and calm, cool and collected. JMO

Trial for Idaho college killings suspect Bryan Kohberger delayed indefinitely - ABC News​

 

[katydid23]

BK was so smirky in this hearing, even if he tried to hide it. It made me nauseous, he thinks this is game.

IMO

Genetic genealogy was used to link Bryan Kohberger, suspect in Idaho slayings, to crime scene, prosecutors say​

 

[girlhasnoname]

This may have already been posted an I missed it:

Sibling receives scholarship in memory of brother slain in University of Idaho stabbing

<snipped>

Nearly a year after Ethan Chapin and three other University of Idaho students were killed in an attack near campus, his brother received an award created in his brother’s honor. Hunter Chapin received the inaugural Ethan Chapin Memorial Scholarship from the Sigma Chi Foundation at Wednesday night’s Sigma Chi fraternity scholarship dinner. Both Ethan and Hunter were members of the fraternity.

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/community/boise/article281012438.html