4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #98

[Gemmie]

Starting!

 

[arielilane]

@cathyrusson

LIVE HEARING: Idaho Student Murders — ID v. Bryan Kohberger
https://youtube.com/live/EcVERP17kDk?si=4G6RjstRW-jDk2W3 via @YouTube

https://twitter.com/x/status/1882185324002185281

 

[SpiderFalcon]

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/012125-Reply-States-Objection-Defendants-Motion-Unseal-IGG-Suppression-Briefing.pdf

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/012225-Order-Regarding-Presentation-ICC-Evidence.pdf

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/012225-Order-Sealing-Defendants-Supplemental-Witness-List-Motions-hearing-012325.pdf

 

[MassGuy]

Ok, I caught a couple tidbits. The reason the judge doesn't want to have people in the courtroom for the hearing(s) is that if something comes up that the parties or judge believe shouldn't be revealed, it's a pain to keep clearing the courtroom. With a stream, he can simply kill the feed.

"I can't unring a bell."

He's concerned with evidence that won't come up at trial, impacting the jury pool by coming out during this process. This was after all, the purpose of moving the trial in the first place. He's trying to balance the public's right to know with making this trial fair. He's really between a rock and a hard place here.

Concerned that the shift in the defense (now open to making certain things public), is an effort to influence the public.

ETA: Also asked the parties to stop filing things under seal that shouldn’t be.

 

[CKS]

I agree with your statement here.

Why then, in your opinion, is the defense team working feverishly to have the DNA results EXCLUDED?

This would appear to be cognitively dissonant if they DON’T want this scientific information to be hidden.

IMO

All MOO

The defense wants it tossed b/c the prosecution won't show their process/work on they get the results. They haven't shown the 'formula' they used and are still keeping it a secret.

Why won't they just show the defense? What's the big secret?

Not saying BK is innocent but personally in my opinion from what we've seen they have nearly nothing on BK to prosecute him. Sure they've told everyone it's his DNA but why won't they just show the defense how they came to that conclusion?

Other than the DNA they literally have nothing on him in my opinion. They can't even prove BK was ever at the house or even ever in the house.

Apologies if this opinion isn't popular but personally I just don't see what clear cut evidence they have against him. Obviously that could all change but from what I've seen it's by no means a slam dunk.


MOO

 

[CKS]

Ok, I caught a couple tidbits. The reason the judge doesn't want to have people in the courtroom for the hearing(s) is that if something comes up that the parties or judge believe shouldn't be revealed, it's a pain to keep clearing the courtroom. With a stream, he can simply kill the feed.

"I can't unring a bell."

He's concerned with evidence that won't come up at trial, impacting the jury pool by coming out during this process. This was after all, the purpose of moving the trial in the first place. He's trying to balance the public's right to know with making this trial fair. He's really between a rock and a hard place here.

Concerned that the shift in the defense (now open to making certain things public), is an effort to influence the public.

All MOO

If the defendant (BK) is asking for a public trial that is his right is it not?


MOO

 

[CKS]

I agree with your statement here.

Why then, in your opinion, is the defense team working feverishly to have the DNA results EXCLUDED?

This would appear to be cognitively dissonant if they DON’T want this scientific information to be hidden.

IMO

MOO

They want is excluded b/c they have not seen the process on how they came to the conclusion it his DNA from what I understand but definitely could be wrong.

 

[MassGuy]

All MOO

If the defendant (BK) is asking for a public trial that is his right is it not?


MOO

His trial will be public, all trials are.

A defendant can’t have it both ways. You can’t demand the trial be moved so you can have an unbiased jury, request to have a bunch of things remain under seal, then hold a hearing publicly only when it benefits you.

 

[wendy44]

All MOO

The defense wants it tossed b/c the prosecution won't show their process/work on they get the results. They haven't shown the 'formula' they used and are still keeping it a secret.

Why won't they just show the defense? What's the big secret?

Not saying BK is innocent but personally in my opinion from what we've seen they have nearly nothing on BK to prosecute him. Sure they've told everyone it's his DNA but why won't they just show the defense how they came to that conclusion?

Other than the DNA they literally have nothing on him in my opinion. They can't even prove BK was ever at the house or even ever in the house.

Apologies if this opinion isn't popular but personally I just don't see what clear cut evidence they have against him. Obviously that could all change but from what I've seen it's by no means a slam dunk.


MOO

I think they have though. They met in camera and the judge decided what materials should be turned over and to our knowledge, they have been turned over. There is no secret.

I would be happy to walk through a hypothetical of how the IGG was likely done (using numbers in place of names) if that would be interesting/allowed.

 

[MassGuy]

All MOO

The defense wants it tossed b/c the prosecution won't show their process/work on they get the results. They haven't shown the 'formula' they used and are still keeping it a secret.

Why won't they just show the defense? What's the big secret?

Not saying BK is innocent but personally in my opinion from what we've seen they have nearly nothing on BK to prosecute him. Sure they've told everyone it's his DNA but why won't they just show the defense how they came to that conclusion?

Other than the DNA they literally have nothing on him in my opinion. They can't even prove BK was ever at the house or even ever in the house.

Apologies if this opinion isn't popular but personally I just don't see what clear cut evidence they have against him. Obviously that could all change but from what I've seen it's by no means a slam dunk.


MOO

Focusing on the following, as I find it remarkable.

Not saying BK is innocent but personally in my opinion from what we've seen they have nearly nothing on BK to prosecute him. Sure they've told everyone it's his DNA but why won't they just show the defense how they came to that conclusion?

They have his DNA at the murder scene, on the sheath of a murder weapon used to massacre 4 people.

His phone was conveniently off during the period of the murders.

A matching car was spotted at the murder scene, and also spotted returning to his college after his phone came back online.

His phone data had him at that scene multiple times in the weeks prior to the murders, at suspicious times (late at night, early morning).

Two independent lines of inquiry, done by different agencies, both focused in on the same guy (Feds with IGG, and WSU with the car).

You say this is thin, and I say this is a slam dunk already.

There’s more coming…

 

[Nila Aella]

Reply to States Objection to Motion to unseal

Mr. Kohberger stipulated to a non-dissemination order to avoid over 100 law enforcement personnel from speaking publicly about the case before trial. That stipulation was in no way intended to circumvent his right to have matters properly before the court, heard openly in public, with a judge presiding over an adversarial hearing. The significant downside to having stipulated to the non-dissemination order is that Mr. Kohberger cannot correct the many, many false reports in the media which have resulted in an overwhelming public sentiment of his guilt. It is no surprise that the State wants no part in stopping that narrative and hence objects to an open suppression hearing where legitimate legal issues will be heard.

Unsealing the pleadings and hearing, post jury trial does not present the Court with a reasonable alternative to opening the suppression hearing. It is no alternative since the recommended remedy is post-trial and his right to a public trail is now.

The State’s concern about potential juror influence is misplaced. The only influence that there may be on potential jurors is their learning that there is more than the current guilt narrative about this case. It is no secret that a public hearing will allow the opportunity for the adversarial process to lend itself to a fuller picture. One that is more than the current guilt narrative. Mr. Kohberger’s Sixth Amendment Right to a fair and public trial does not begin with jury selection. It began the day he was arrested.

Now two years into the State having control of the narrative through its extensive probable cause statement, a suppression hearing is exactly the proceeding where his right to have motions heard publicly matters.

“The Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause provides that, ‘In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him.’” Crawford v. Washington,

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/012125-Reply-States-Objection-Defendants-Motion-Unseal-IGG-Suppression-Briefing.pdf

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I presume that scientists engaged in the rigors of DNA testing are accustomed to this and ergo disregard “bovine DNA” from any findings.

I would imagine that any type of inanimate material in which human DNA could be couched would be deemed irrelevant to the identification of a human suspect.

As @Boxer said somewhere above, no one suspects a cow.

IMO

BBM. Very appreciative that you raise this point as fairly sure that when LE detect evidence of other species in a case like this, it's not a lead they follow, looking for murderous cows armed with military grade knives. JMO

 

[Nila Aella]

Order regarding presentation of ICC:

Although the hearing set for January 23, 2025 is not intended as a Franks hearing, in the interests oftime and efficiency, the Court will permit the parties to present their evidence on the IGG issue as if it were a Franks hearing. By permitting such evidence, the Court is not concluding or implying that Defendant has satisfied the preliminary showing required by Franks on the IGG issue, nor is the Court bound to consider the full extent of evidence if it ultimately concludes Defendant's proffer insufficient to warrant a Franks hearing on the matter. This is simply intended as a time and resource-saving measure.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/012225-Order-Regarding-Presentation-ICC-Evidence.pdf

Why wasn't the Franks motion decided first?
JMO

 

[Dotta]

"Bryan Kohberger judge
considers major decision
days before key hearing in Idaho murder case."

Bryan Kohberger judge considers major decision ahead of murders trial

Kohberger skipped court yet again on Wednesday as his attorneys went back-and-forth with prosecutors over whether critical evidence in his murder trial will be struck off from his case.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[NoSpoonFeeding]

The lab report would definitely show bovine DNA and human DNA and any other DNA they found. Lab reports NEVER disregard any element of something they are testing because there can be unexpected results.

My opinion is that the sheath snap was removed and examined, perhaps visible debris was on the edge of the metal, on the underside of the snap, and/or on the leather spot now exposed. I think it was swabbed or scrapped. I don't think the leather was cut out and DNA was extracted from a leather sample, which is a very different process. That would never be the first approach as it "defaces" the evidence. It sounds to me that you think merely swabbing a small area, where the goal is too collect human skin cells, would also collect DNA of the cow (?). The hide was cleaned and treated, the animal is dead and no longer sheds skin cells/hair.
Even the extraction method, for example if 2 gloves were tested to prove they were a "pair", might not show a match, nor yield DNA of the animal, but might show the DNA from a person's blood or skin cells.
MOO

The Influence of Tanning Chemical Agents on DNA Degradation: A Robust Procedure for the Analysis of Tanned Animal Hide—A Pilot Study - PMC

Illegal wildlife trade is currently on the rise, and it is becoming one of the most lucrative crime sectors. The rarer the species, the higher the demand. Wildlife trade falls under international regulations, such as the CITES convention. Proving ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"Tanned hides represent a specific category of biological material that poses challenges for obtaining viable DNA, with DNA extracted from such material frequently being heavily degraded [16]."

 

[LinasK]

Of course it is relevant. If a leather sheath is tested in a lab setting where it is properly swabbed for DNA at various likely touch points (one swab per touch point), there should be some bovine DNA picked up during the swabbing. If no bovine DNA was picked up, then the accuracy of the test should be in question. If, for example, it turns out that the sheath was ONLY swabbed on the snap and nowhere else and no bovine DNA was detected, that would be suspicious and make me question whether or not the test was valid. Anytime results of a scientific test are going to be used as evidence, the methodology is just as important as the results in deciding if the evidence is valid or not.

JMO.

No one is going to swab for Bovine DNA because it's not relevant to who is a suspect in the case. Bovine DNA in manufacturing isn't relevant. If you want to argue Touch DNA in manufacturing, like in the case of the underwear in JB Ramsey's case, that's a different story.

 

[LinasK]

Respectfully, can you provide a link to any case or DNA report of another case where bovine DNA was mentioned during trial or preliminary hearings involving a human being accused of murder?

I’m not interested in educational DNA links, please. I would kindly like to see where bovine DNA results were reported on a murder case specifically where human DNA was the desired end result.

Thanks!

ETA if you previously have provided this, my apologies for overlooking it.

I actually have seen dog fur DNA used though when the suspect's dog proved that the murder was committed at the suspect's home.

 

[iamshadow21]

I actually have seen dog fur DNA used though when the suspect's dog proved that the murder was committed at the suspect's home.

Context is everything.

A dog hair that can be linked back to a suspect is relevant.

The DNA of whatever cow or pig gave its life to make a commercially made mass produced sheath is not.

What is relevant is whatever contributions of human DNA are found on use points of that sheath.

MOO

 

[INfisherman]

I actually have seen dog fur DNA used though when the suspect's dog proved that the murder was committed at the suspect's home.

Context is everything.

A dog hair that can be linked back to a suspect is relevant.

The DNA of whatever cow or pig gave its life to make a commercially made mass produced sheath is not.

What is relevant is whatever contributions of human DNA are found on use points of that sheath.

MOO

Replying to both OPs.

There we go. Agreed.

 

[Nila Aella]

Can you provide a link that demonstrates it's clear the defense thinks something is very wrong with the IGG? Every motion from the defense shows that it's clear they believe it to be very right. If the IGG is wrong, there is no 4th Amendment challenge, no Franks, no avenue to have the warrants tossed. These legal challenges depend on the IGG being the investigative tool to lead to BK.

I honestly say this with no snark intended--do you understand how IGG works? Do you understand the process? Do you understand what they do from uploading the unknown profile to narrowing it down to a suspect or suspects? These theories do not really make sense with how IGG is done and how completely separate it is from the dna on the sheath matching BK's dna.

It's true the FBI fought to not turn over work product because they believed it did not fall under discovery. There is case law cited by Judge Judge that supports they are correct in that. It's not true, as far as we know, that the prosecution has tried their best to hide everything about the procedures for processing the dna. Unless you have a link to show that.

What problem? Where has the defense shown any indication they believe something is wrong with the dna match? Where specifically? Their only concern has been getting it thrown out because it is indeed a match.
JMO

BBM

The State fought to not turn over the IGG material from the very beginning.
The fbi and every agency that assisted MPD's inquiry are agents of the State.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/061623+States+Motion+for+Protective+Order.pdf

JMO