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

[Nila Aella]

So I want to preface this by saying, re:the prosecutors fallacy, though I like to repeat that 1 in 5 quintillion number as damning evidence against BK. I don't think that Prosecutors need it. Their case is just as strong without it. It's about the confluence of evidence for me. Dismissing all of it (or most of it) as coincidences, misunderstandings, or a frame job is illogical. And I think the jury will ultimately find that to be a unreasonable conclusion.

So I read Barlow's (a defense hired expert, from my understanding) filling this morning and took notes. I'm a crappy note taker so here's only the first half. I'll finish turning the other half into real worlds later.

Disclaimer : this is my opinion. I'm not an expert. I'm not even close to one. Do not claim to be one. I'm not going to disagree with any of the science because I can't. I read this in a vacuum, as a layman, with no Google.

This is my interpretation of things that I read and noticed...ALL JMO!!!!

• IMO Barlow uses the term "Standard STR" and never defines what "Standard STR" is. This immediately set off my spidey senses and I knew she was going for a broad unreliability argument. Lumping together partial and complete.
• But I was wrong. She doesn't even make an attempt to mention what a complete profile is. It's almost like she acts like it doesn't exist. MOO
• The furthest she goes is to say that STR profiles are designed to produce a comprehensive set of markers. But never tells us what the most comprehensive set of markers looks like and means in relation to her argument. JMO
• In my reading and opinion she is more than happy though to bundle "degraded" or "partial" STR profiles under "Standard STR". Or at least heavily implies it and makes no attempts to qualify those against 'Standard STR'. Just leaves it up to the imagination. JMO
• She goes on to talk about how the degraded and partial STR profiles resulted in multiple mis-matches in CODIS.
• Of course she mentions that those darn degraded and partial profiles were also extracted from mixed blood. Just like in BKs case.
• It's really too bad she doesn't go into any examples of a FULL profile (not my characterization) being extracted and put into a database like CODIS...........
• Luckily we don't need her to answer that question. The Moscow police did.....They've been pretty clear about the profile that they have. It matched BKs. And they've never classified it as "partial" nor "degraded".
• I'm going to assume that the defense has the DNA evidence and could have talked more explicitly about BKs extracted profile and it's hit in CODIS? Wonder Barlow didn't do that....it makes the DMP stuff read like 'pounding the table' IMO
  • Instead...I noticed multiple times while reading that I found myself trying to figure out if she was still talking about SNP and IGG or if she was talking about STR and CODIS. Like with her use of 'Standard STR', a distinction (via a direct comparison) is rarely made. This is my opinion and interpretation of what I read.
  • The filing is about 80% about IGG and SNP and Familial DB by my reading. STR gets mentioned in all of it's worst case scenarios but never to the level of what Moscow PD imply/claim they ave.
  • I'm suspecting that if Barlow did directly address the actual profile pulled from the local lab....this entire document would be moot. But then the ' the ends are just as unreliable as the means ' argument wouldn't work. JMO
  • I'll get together the other notes and post a part 2.

It is perfectly understandable that 80% of her declaration was concerning IGG. This was a motion to compel IGG information.
jmo

 

[MassGuy]

The biggest, most ongoing problem on these threads has been the conflation of the IGG and the match of the dna on the sheath to BK. Two completely different things. The defense intends to challenge the constitutionality of using IGG in an investigation, but they have never, to our knowledge, contested that the dna on the sheath is a match to BK. He is a match.
JMO

Exactly. The goal is to claim that the IGG was unconstitutional, and that everything else is fruit of the poisonous tree. I'm sure they'll attempt to explain away the DNA during trial, but their objective is for their not to be a trial in the first place (or at least hamstring the prosecution as much as possible).

They know full well that's his DNA on the sheath.

 

[Nila Aella]

Good find--so if the defense has requested additional testing the prosecution has facilitated that.

Bolded by me--The evidence from the crime scene, the DNA, and the results of tests on the evidence from the crime scene, the genetic profiles and the match to BK, have nothing to do with this fight over discovery. The defense has always had that. IGG is not evidence. It's an investigative technique that uses the evidence to lead you to a suspect. The DNA test that matches (or doesn't) that suspect to the DNA from the crime scene is the evidence.

My main point was that it should be clear that it was the FBI holding the IGG, not the local prosecution. I think it's important to be clear on that because every time this is brought up, it paints the local prosecution as being shady. They didn't turn it over because they didn't have it. The FBI was resisting turning the information over because they said it didn't fall under discovery.

But to your points--this is really all going to be up to the court. Idaho Criminal Rule says that the supervision of discovery is a discretionary power of the trial court. Judge Judge addresses this in his Order Addressing IGG DNA and Order For In Camera Review in October 2023.

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

Disclosure of information gathered from an IGG investigation is an issue of first impression in Idaho. It hasn't been litigated there yet. Judge Judge looked to other courts when he was writing this order.

"The issue of disclosure of information gathered from an IGG investigation is an issue of first impression in Idaho...while there is no precedent in Idaho, what limited cases are available from other jurisdictions are worth discussing."

The judge cited In the Matter of: Michael Green, where Green argued he was entitled to genetic genealogy information, saying it was necessary to ascertain the details of what, when, where and how the investigation into him occurred, the identity of the other possible matches so they could be interviewed and a possible Fourth Amendment violation.

The trial court held:

"the prosecution was not obligated to discover to Green the requested match Detail Reports, long-form candidate Match Reports, family tree information, lists of people identified, or any other information from its Forensic Genetic Genealogy investigation."

"The evidence that is material to Green's guilt or innocence is the testing that followed the FGG investigation, which directly compared a fresh swab of Green's DNA with the DNA profile collected from the victim's nightgown. It is only this evidence that the People intend to present at trial. The People are not obligated to provide its preliminary search of the genealogy databases for possible matches, which is investigatory in nature and is not exculpatory or material to Green's defense...A mere possibility that the information might help the defense does not establish that this information is material."

So there is case law that supports the contention that the IGG work product is not subject to discovery because it's not exculpatory or material to the preparation of the defense. There is case law that says what's material and discoverable is the DNA test for the match following the IGG, but not the IGG.

(Judge Judge cites two additional cases that don't directly address IGG and discovery--his point is that, based on the rulings, the defendants likely had some access to the IGG information. But no case law regarding IGG and discovery are contained there.)

In the Judge's analysis:

Kohberger has presented enough evidence to meet the “low threshold” required to show at least some ofthe IGG information sought is material to the preparation of the defense.

The Court cannot say that the material sought will not “play an important role in uncovering admissible evidence, aiding witness preparation, corroborating testimony, or assisting impeachment or rebuttal.” Id. For these reasons, Kohberger has met the “low threshold” required to show at least some of the IGG information is material to the preparation ofthe defense.

It is undisputed that the SNP profile itself is the result of a scientific test done on evidence in the case.

Kohberger has established there is “substantial need” for at least some of the IGG information sought so that he can potentially challenge various parts of the State’s case against him. Although it is feasible that with the SNP profile the defense may be able to conduct their own IGG investigation and learn what the State learned, such work would be time consuming and expensive and would constitute an undue hardship on the defense.

JJJ background section: Page 2.
Chronological order of events.

Judge footnote:
1 At oral argument on August l8, 2023, the Court asked the State directly if any information obtained from the SNP profile, the use of IGG, or the family tree created was used to obtain any warrant in the case. The State represented that it was not. The Court has confirmed that nothing about the use of IGG or a family tree was used in the affidavit to obtain the arrest warrant for Kohberger or in the affidavit to obtain the search warrant for Kohberger’s DNA.

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

Ultimately, Judge Judge agreed to meet in camera with the prosecution to review the materials and decide what was material to BK's defense and should be released to him under discovery. I believe this happened and the materials deemed to fall under discovery have been turned over. The FBI was always going to fight turning over what they consider an investigative tool.

Also in that document--the prosecution turned over the SNP from the very beginning. That was all that was needed for the defense to do their own IGG. What they were really looking for was the date the FBI gave the name to the prosecution.

JMO

There are two different labs that did IGG work. The Private lab and the fbi.

The State motion for protective order 6/16/23 filed after the D MTC.

States Argument

The State seeks a protective order for a narrow category of information—namely,
information related to the use of IGG in this case.

Specifically, the State seeks to protect the following information:

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, analyst notes, etc.

All information related to IGG efforts in creating a family tree and identifying Defendant’s potential relatives, including the identities of the genetic genealogy service(s) and the personally identifying information of Defendant’s relatives.

The States argument cites the cases mentioned arguing why they think it should not be turned over and requesting the in camera review.

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

The Judge ordered records to be turned over twice (not necessarily the same records).
The Motion to Compel 4/5 (May 2024) was a closed hearing and the Order was never made public.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/011325-Motion-Unseal-IGG-Suppression-Briefing-Hearing.pdf

I expect the agents of the State/State complied with both Orders by JJJ.

I agree that the dates were important to the D, but IMO not the only thing that was important to them.

ALL JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

<modsnip - quoted post, response removed>

Still occasionally pondering what bovine dna embedded in a leather knife sheathe Moo has to do with a full profile of BK's DNA being on the snap. Moo

Nothing. Professionals can tell the difference immediately. 2 Cents

 

[arielilane]

@kfixler

This week, #BryanKohberger returns to a #Boise courtroom as his defense makes its case to exclude key evidence, including DNA and cell data, from his #Idaho4 murder trial. A Tuesday hearing is closed to the public, and Thursday is open for oral arguments.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1881724750680207829

 

[MassGuy]

@kfixler

This week, #BryanKohberger returns to a #Boise courtroom as his defense makes its case to exclude key evidence, including DNA and cell data, from his #Idaho4 murder trial. A Tuesday hearing is closed to the public, and Thursday is open for oral arguments.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1881724750680207829

I just can’t wait until this nonsense is put to bed:

Attorney David Gurney is a national IGG expert, and director of Ramapo College of New Jersey’s IGG Center. He said that he expected the defense in the Kohberger case would raise a Fourth Amendment challenge — and that such an argument is almost certain to fail. “There is no Fourth Amendment violation in the use of IGG,” Gurney said Monday in an email to the Idaho Statesman. “Every court that has heard challenges to the use of abandoned DNA by law enforcement has rejected them. The use of crime-scene DNA does not even constitute a search, so the Fourth Amendment is not implicated.” The prior judge in the Kohberger case also appeared skeptical about a constitutional rights defense against the use of IGG, but after an eight-month battle awarded Kohberger’s attorneys at least some of those records in the case.

The prosecution said the FBI used one or more public ancestry websites during the investigation, but has not revealed which ones. Law enforcement does not have access to the databases from services 23andMe and Ancestry.com, and primarily works with two lesser-known companies called FamilyTreeDNA and GEDmatch — both of which were used to solve the Golden State Killer cold case.

Another genealogy website, MyHeritage, also helped identify the suspect in California, according to Gurney. “Whether they used GEDmatch, FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage — or any combination — makes no difference to the Fourth Amendment analysis,” Gurney said of the Kohberger case.

Read more at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article298766928.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Justice101]

I just can’t wait until this nonsense is put to bed:

Attorney David Gurney is a national IGG expert, and director of Ramapo College of New Jersey’s IGG Center. He said that he expected the defense in the Kohberger case would raise a Fourth Amendment challenge — and that such an argument is almost certain to fail. “There is no Fourth Amendment violation in the use of IGG,” Gurney said Monday in an email to the Idaho Statesman. “Every court that has heard challenges to the use of abandoned DNA by law enforcement has rejected them. The use of crime-scene DNA does not even constitute a search, so the Fourth Amendment is not implicated.” The prior judge in the Kohberger case also appeared skeptical about a constitutional rights defense against the use of IGG, but after an eight-month battle awarded Kohberger’s attorneys at least some of those records in the case.

The prosecution said the FBI used one or more public ancestry websites during the investigation, but has not revealed which ones. Law enforcement does not have access to the databases from services 23andMe and Ancestry.com, and primarily works with two lesser-known companies called FamilyTreeDNA and GEDmatch — both of which were used to solve the Golden State Killer cold case.

Another genealogy website, MyHeritage, also helped identify the suspect in California, according to Gurney. “Whether they used GEDmatch, FamilyTreeDNA, MyHeritage — or any combination — makes no difference to the Fourth Amendment analysis,” Gurney said of the Kohberger case.

Read more at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article298766928.html#storylink=cpy

Yes, there is a huge amount of nonsense that I cannot imagine will sway the jurors any. just my 2 cents worth

 

[imstilla.grandma]

It is unclear whether the arguments over suppressing the IGG evidence will take place at the public hearing later this week. Hippler is expected to rule on the issue in advance of Thursday’s hearing, which is set to start at 9 a.m. If needed, the evidence suppression hearing would extend to Friday, also starting at 9 a.m.

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article298766928.html

 

[Balthazar]

<modsnip - quoted post, response removed>

Still occasionally pondering what bovine dna embedded in a leather knife sheathe Moo has to do with a full profile of BK's DNA being on the snap. Moo

Only that the bovine DNA should have been detected and listed on the lab report along with the (at the time) unknown human DNA sample. If it was not detected, then why not?

So my point is, we need to see the lab report before we decide anything about the DNA report on the sheath or even trust its accuracy.

 

[Arkay]

I actually saw my doppelganger once. I highly doubt that she shares the same medical conditions that I have.

I’m an identical twin. We don’t have the same medical conditions at all. She’s had cancer and I haven’t, for one thing among many.

I’ve been reading here but haven’t had the patience to post.

Yet seeing claims about doppelgängers having similar DNA and thus there may have been a doppelgänger for BK makes me feel compelled to point out that, as several have said, they will NOT have the SAME DNA.

My twin and my eldest granddaughter both took 23&Me for fun. I didn’t bother. Yet my twin sister and granddaughter were told they were grandmother and granddaughter.

So just to reinforce what @LinasK and @MassGuy stated above….even identical twins like me, born as two people from one egg that split, will not be the same in life even though we do indeed have identical DNA.

Also identical twins have different fingerprints (formed by how we touch our mother’s womb) and certainly doppelgängers who look similar will have their own unique prints.

My experience.

ETA: Nor drive the same car, as @jepop pointed out!

 

[Balthazar]

Exactly! It's irrelevant. and not the same as "Touch DNA" because cows don't murder.

No, it is not irrelevant. In this case we have what appears to be a miniscule sample of touch DNA. If it was on the snap, it is likely degraded because a brass snap contains copper which degrades DNA and the DNA sat on the snap at minimum 4 days until it was tested - and there is no way to know how long BEFORE the murders that the DNA was deposited. Unfortunately DNA testing cannot tell us that. If the DNA is degraded or very degraded it is not a complete profile and could easily indicate another suspect - someone who may be distantly related to BK that BK doesn't even know.

Further, if I see this report and it shows that the only part of the sheath that was tested for DNA is the female part of the snap or only the snap, I'm going to have a lot of questions about why that was. So I am looking for a report that shows that the leather of the sheath, the pocket of the sheath, the snap of the sheath were all tested at minimum. It is important to know if objects are tested correctly and at the right level of detail before deciding if they are valid evidence.

Of course we don't have any of this information yet, so there is no way to judge the evidence at this point.

 

[Nila Aella]

Case Summary Page

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/Summary/Case-Summary-Kohberger-01212025.pdf

 

[Balthazar]

I’m an identical twin. We don’t have the same medical conditions at all. She’s had cancer and I haven’t, for one thing among many.

That difference between you and your twin sister can be accounted for by nurture instead of nature. Both affect what happens to us. If you sister does not live with you and you two don't do everything together and eat the same foods and drink the same drinks, these differences in lifestyle can impact individuals and cause differences like cancer.

I’ve been reading here but haven’t had the patience to post.

Yet seeing claims about doppelgängers having similar DNA and thus there may have been a doppelgänger for BK makes me feel compelled to point out that, as several have said, they will NOT have the SAME DNA.

Dopplegangers DO actually have extremely similar DNA. That's a scientific fact:

Doppelgängers Similar in Looks and DNA: Study

Look-alikes are also more likely to share lifestyle traits.

www.the-scientist.com

IMO, we don't know enough about the DNA in this case to decide what it really means. It is very difficult to assess evidence without actually seeing the evidence and/or reports on it. Could BK have some second through sixth cousin that could be mistaken for him in a degraded DNA sample? There are around 97,000 males out there that make that answer an absolute yes. (97,000 is the average number of male cousins most Americans have in the 1st through 6th generation.)

My twin and my eldest granddaughter both took 23&Me for fun. I didn’t bother. Yet my twin sister and granddaughter were told they were grandmother and granddaughter.

This is not unusual, parents are sometimes mis-attributed, even with sisters and brothers who are not identical twins in DNA testing.

IMO, something is wrong with the IGG in this case. I don't know what that is specifically yet, but there IS evidence for my assertion is several of the hearings. Today's closed hearing may be about this issue.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/011525-Notice-Hearing.pdf

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/Summary/Case-Summary-Kohberger-01212025.pdf

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article298766928.html

Before these murders happened, BK took a DNA test to learn about his ancestry, so it seems, he would still have access to that via his attorney. This makes me wonder what the defense knows about BK's DNA. Clearly in the hearings, there has been something they are very concerned about.

Idaho suspect Bryan Kohberger sent DNA for genetic testing to explore ancestry: neighbor

Bryan Kohberger told a fellow grad student that he explored his ancestry by submitting DNA for genetic testing – which could shed light on how investigators used forensic genealogy to zero in on th…

nypost.com

So just to reinforce what @LinasK and @MassGuy stated above….even identical twins like me, born as two people from one egg that split, will not be the same in life even though we do indeed have identical DNA.

Also identical twins have different fingerprints (formed by how we touch our mother’s womb) and certainly doppelgängers who look similar will have their own unique prints.

My experience.

ETA: Nor drive the same car, as @jepop pointed out!

I have not seen any evidence of fingerprints in this particular case. Have you? If you have, can you provide a link? I would like to see the information.

 

[Boxer]

Only that the bovine DNA should have been detected and listed on the lab report along with the (at the time) unknown human DNA sample. If it was not detected, then why not?

So my point is, we need to see the lab report before we decide anything about the DNA report on the sheath or even trust its accuracy.

Why? Its the medium upon which single source human male DNA was found.
No one suspects a cow.

 

[Balthazar]

Why? Its the medium upon which single source human male DNA was found.
No one suspects a cow.

I would think the answer to that question is obvious. I'm looking for validation of the proper analysis of the evidence. It is odd that the DNA was only found on one location on the sheath. I would want evidence that the logical touch points of the sheath were swabbed and tested, not just one part of it. If it wasn't done, then I would wonder why and, IMO, that would be something that should be investigated.

 

[SpiderFalcon]

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/012125-Order-Governing-Proceedings-January-23-24-Hearings.pdf

 

[SpiderFalcon]

 

[MassGuy]

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2025/012125-Order-Governing-Proceedings-January-23-24-Hearings.pdf

Alright, we expected then.

IGG hearing closed to the public, and remaining motions open the following day (barring any effort to keep portions private).

I just hope we get rulings soon.

 

[arielilane]

@BrianEntin


1/2 In an interesting move I have not seen before -- the courtroom where the Bryan Kohberger pre-trial hearings will take place Thursday and Friday will be closed to the public. There will be a live stream, but the judge will "revert to sealed proceedings on and off throughout.”

2/2 The closed portions will be for testimony related to Kohberger's motion to suppress, and evidence including genetic information related to DNA.But the judge is not allowing public (media included) inside the courtroom for any of it -- including the open portions.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1881878363113177414

 

[arielilane]

In hearings this week that will likely set the table for his summer murder trial, Bryan Kohberger and his attorneys will return to the courtroom for the first time in more than two months to argue for excluding a host of evidence.

Kohberger defense trying to nix key evidence in Idaho murder trial

Bryan Kohberger and his attorneys will argue at hearings this week for excluding a host of evidence in the homicide case that is heading toward a summer trial.

www.seattletimes.com

1/21/2025