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

[mickey2942]

My fingerprints are on file, as a requirement of licensing for my job. I have no idea what databases they are in. There are cameras everywhere, and face recognition software is in use already. I imagine it will improve and grow in the future. DNA is being collected and stored in databases, and individuals can be tracked down using the science gathered from somewhat distant relatives. Phones track our movements. The train is barreling the track, and I don’t see that we are going back.

I agree. While I have never consented to give my DNA, my son in the military has given his, so there you go. My daughter has done "23andMe" for whatever reason. So, it is probably easy to find my "DNA" in whatever database there is, including my half brother who was incarcerated in a federal prison for drug charges. All of whom can easily be traced to me. They gave their "consent" or whatever. It wasn't me, but nonetheless, my DNA is there now in whatever databases there are.

I have no doubt, countries like China are already routinely collecting DNA from infants in the hospital. We will probably be there soon.

 

[Megnut]

Right? I mean there's literally a whole manual of what not to do right here on WS, case after case of stupid criminals making stupid mistakes, and yet.....

Well, exactly.

 

[GoJacks]

This happened in every case I followed except the one where they used burners lol

I suspect we'll see more of criminals trying to fake phone activity to give themselves a digital alibi

If i was planning a murder I think i'd change my phone habits at least 6 months before!

I mean if you're going to drive your own car to the murder and park right outside, probably a moot point to change your phone activity at that point tbh. He might as well left it on in his pocket, ha.

 

[Rolypolyoly]

I mean if you're going to drive your own car to the murder and park right outside, probably a moot point to change your phone activity at that point tbh. He might as well left it on in his pocket, ha.

Or left a little card " Bryan wuz 'ere"

 

[Megnut]

I mean if you're going to drive your own car to the murder and park right outside, probably a moot point to change your phone activity at that point tbh. He might as well left it on in his pocket, ha.

Except.... he's a student of criminology... we don't know what lengths he went to prep his vehicle...

Whether he protected tge interior in any way. Like with plastic sheeting, certainly services it with repeated cleaning. Did he obscure the license plate? Did he swap his out for another? Did he choose a route to minimize CCTV capture? Perhaps 12 prior trips to Moscow were recon. Surveillance for Surveillance. Did he have a sense for where the cameras were? Midrange white Elantra is about as generic a car as there is.

Defense has a hard row here and a flimsy hoe to hoe it -- sever BK from the Elantra, sever the Elantra from BK's phone, marry BK to his OFF phone and sell BK, in a different white car, driving with his phone in an area without cell coverage at 4 in the morning. Anywhere but 1122...

What's backfiring biggest in the two-day hearing -- the Defense is revealing their sad strategy -- out ahead of the State/trial. And the State is remaining tight-lipped on the details of their case in chief. We're only seeing it because the Defense, in desperation, is arguing against it! DNA, CCTV, CAST, Amazon...

BK seems to have checked every single box for how to catch a murderer.

JMO

 

[Arkay]

My fingerprints are on file, as a requirement of licensing for my job. I have no idea what databases they are in. There are cameras everywhere, and face recognition software is in use already. I imagine it will improve and grow in the future. DNA is being collected and stored in databases, and individuals can be tracked down using the science gathered from somewhat distant relatives. Phones track our movements. The train is barreling the track, and I don’t see that we are going back.

Same. NYC teacher and before we can begin, we are fingerprinted to ensure we are safe to work around children. Until those prints clear we cannot be in a classroom.

I started in 1991, so I don’t know what, if any, other means are employed now.

It’s never bothered me, though.

 

[AnnieAnnieAnnieAnnie]

I agree. While I have never consented to give my DNA, my son in the military has given his, so there you go. My daughter has done "23andMe" for whatever reason. So, it is probably easy to find my "DNA" in whatever database there is, including my half brother who was incarcerated in a federal prison for drug charges. All of whom can easily be traced to me. They gave their "consent" or whatever. It wasn't me, but nonetheless, my DNA is there now in whatever databases there are.

I have no doubt, countries like China are already routinely collecting DNA from infants in the hospital. We will probably be there soon.

Some parts of your country already are.

Bills to shed light on newborn DNA storage in California quietly killed or gutted

Lawmakers quietly amended a bill prompted by a decade-long CBS investigation into California's Newborn Genetic Biobank. They removed the part that requires the state to reveal who is using our DNA for research and why.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[INfisherman]

His potential next victim if she isn't careful. I believe that is E. Massoth part of the Defense Team brought on after the State requested and received additional help. I find her very smart and she has written some good Motions lately, far better than Logsdon IMO.

She does appear to sit closely and smiles at BK a lot. Maybe by design to show that he's just a lovable, misunderstood guy, not a diabolical mass murderer. It's ironic to me that both AT and EM are both attractive blonde women (BK's type IMO), and I'm sure BK enjoys having their forced undivided attention. Barf.

I'd love to know what they truly think of BK and what their interactions are like with him. Is he engaged and suggesting ideas and opinions in his Defense, or is he just sitting back and enjoying the show?

JMO

The looks on Hippler’s face yesterday seemed he’d rather have BK jump over & perform his signature Ka-Bar special rather than listen to another second of AT’s thoughts as to what PC might be.

JMO

 

[INfisherman]

Same. NYC teacher and before we can begin, we are fingerprinted to ensure we are safe to work around children. Until those prints clear we cannot be in a classroom.

I started in 1991, so I don’t know what, if any, other means are employed now.

It’s never bothered me, though.

Likely, only criminals should be bothered by it.

JMO

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

I'm probably like 8 months behind on this but the way they're arguing for Amazon records absolutely means he bought the knife on there eh?

I mean I think this has been assumed for awhile but just seems like they really don't want this to be admissable.

Interesting thought @GoJacks …. and if so, maybe the defendant used another identity to purchase it? To try and obscure or hide the purchase? But one that could still be tied to them? Maybe a computer IP address? And as @MassGuy indicated earlier in this thread…. perhaps the suspect bought it in advance of having planned the ‘perfect’ crime. And didn’t realize it would be later located? Time will tell. Once this trial begins. MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

agreed.

I just don't see why i should be big mad about this situation though. While I agree that there needs to be consumer protections, i can't see any down side in criminals being caught this way ...

Like what is the violation of their rights exactly, that ought to be protected here?

MOO

I agree, but it's the narrative AT is pushing to draw the DNA into question.

Our 4th Amendment protects against unreasonable searches, but a criminal who leaves his DNA at the scene of a crime is considered abandoned property and there is no expectation of privacy. Even more so when there is a potential threat to public safety.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I'm probably like 8 months behind on this but the way they're arguing for Amazon records absolutely means he bought the knife on there eh?

I mean I think this has been assumed for awhile but just seems like they really don't want this to be admissable.

Yes, they seem to be very concerned over the Amazon warrants and the Apple warrants in particular. Of course they've been challenging the DNA from the jump, but it's not going to get tossed.

I think these alone will sink BK's battleship, not counting the other evidence they have against him.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

People are just dumb, most murderers in particular. Who needs a phone while committing a murder? If I were planning one, the phone would be left at home & likely playing a very long instructional video on YouTube. Old tech would be for pics if that was my thing. Horrible thoughts, but just sayin’….

JMO

You two stop giving potential killers such helpful advice will ya'? LOL

 

[wendy44]

agreed.

I just don't see why i should be big mad about this situation though. While I agree that there needs to be consumer protections, i can't see any down side in criminals being caught this way ...

Like what is the violation of their rights exactly, that ought to be protected here?

MOO

The argument is essentially--how is law enforcement allowed to obtain your DNA? There are already a number of legal ways they're allowed to do that. The tricky thing about IGG and what makes it different from any other situation, is that you share so much DNA with family members, if law enforcement has theirs, they essentially have yours. Your family member has given it voluntarily, but you haven't. Are they allowed to have yours that way? That's a 4th Amendment issue the courts will have to decide.

I think where AT went sideways was focusing on the right to privacy of the DNA left at the scene. It's already been litigated and established that law enforcement is allowed to have your DNA that way. She spent way too much time trying to argue that. Expectation of privacy is going to be part of it--but the more people become aware of what IGG is and what can be done, the less they're going to have an expectation of privacy. They know that if their relatives have uploaded DNA, their own DNA is essentially uploaded too.

 

[russoca]

There was a case in Montana, proved based on that exact glaring fact, the perpetrator had always consistently checked his email, responded to text messages, over a year of use, except for five hours when his cellphone was turned off. Coincidentally, the same day his girlfriend disappeared.

The case is several years old, when using cellphones forensically was just starting out. It was interesting to me though. Five hours, his phone was off, the only five hours completely off in over 18 months. I tried to find the case, I can't remember it though.

I have an app on my phone, for my car insurance, it tracks my driving history, and I get 15% off my bill for not using my phone while driving. There is a history of where I go, going back a few years. The most boring history ever. Work, home, yoga, VA. I never go anywhere.

Imagine, looking at BK's history, and there are several specific times, when his cellphone is off. Conspicuously on the dates and times of the murder. That is a lot of missing information, for a key time frame.

When looking at cell phones (and other devices) we use a tool called Cellebright. It literally finds pretty much everything, even deleted data that hasn't been overwritten. Getting partial images is common if partially overwritten.
I think back to LE saying during the investigation they were "looking at patterns". This could be one: You get the kind of data they did from the ATT, Verizon, etc, etc. warrants, then they get his phone extraction and overlay the data and you can get amazingly close to narrowing in where the phone was during those over a dozen drives in the area of the house. Think some expert said the cell tower covered 23.7 miles? Well, if they get the GPS data this will narrow it down to feet. The trial will be very interesting.

MOAEO (my opinion and experience only)

 

[Cool Cats]

I agree. While I have never consented to give my DNA, my son in the military has given his, so there you go. My daughter has done "23andMe" for whatever reason. So, it is probably easy to find my "DNA" in whatever database there is, including my half brother who was incarcerated in a federal prison for drug charges. All of whom can easily be traced to me. They gave their "consent" or whatever. It wasn't me, but nonetheless, my DNA is there now in whatever databases there are.

I have no doubt, countries like China are already routinely collecting DNA from infants in the hospital. We will probably be there soon.

My husband's DNA might help science since he has a tiny bit more of neanderthal DNA than the average person so come and get it! I'm 1/2 Finnish and am tired of hearing I am 1/2 finished!

Enjoy our DNA over cocktails. I do not care.

 

[wendy44]

But with familial DNA, they don't have your DNA, all they have is a broad range of names to run with, which is really no different to someone ringing a tip line and offering a name when you think about it, and there's not really anything you could do about that.
They still need to investigate the tip and do the legwork.

Right. And there have been many cases where the IGG could only narrow it down to a family group or set of siblings. The IGG itself is not evidence--you don't bring the family tree into court and point out the suspect in the tree as evidence of his/her guilt. You still have to make the DNA match. This is just what defense attorneys do--every advancement in technology needs to pass constitutional muster.

 

[INfisherman]

When looking at cell phones (and other devices) we use a tool called Cellebright. It literally finds pretty much everything, even deleted data that hasn't been overwritten. Getting partial images is common if partially overwritten.
I think back to LE saying during the investigation they were "looking at patterns". This could be one: You get the kind of data they did from the ATT, Verizon, etc, etc. warrants, then they get his phone extraction and overlay the data and you can get amazingly close to narrowing in where the phone was during those over a dozen drives in the area of the house. Think some expert said the cell tower covered 23.7 miles? Well, if they get the GPS data this will narrow it down to feet. The trial will be very interesting.

MOAEO (my opinion and experience only)

Off topic slightly, but have a gander at the Delphi case. Cell data combined with eyewitness testimony was crucial in building a timeline of the crime. One of the victims also had a short video of the killer on her phone, which the killer left behind at the CS. He was convicted. Zero usable DNA at the CS, which was outside in a wooded area. Was very interesting to learn how both state & defense tried to use the phone data to their advantages & why some of it wasn’t allowed.

ETA clarity

 

[INfisherman]

Right. And there have been many cases where the IGG could only narrow it down to a family group or set of siblings. The IGG itself is not evidence--you don't bring the family tree into court and point out the suspect in the tree as evidence of his/her guilt. You still have to make the DNA match. This is just what defense attorneys do--every advancement in technology needs to pass constitutional muster.

You’re much more familiar with DNA specifics than my pea sized brain - I might be from a closely related tribe of @Cool Cats husband <slides a dozen doughnuts out> - so what’s the difference between going the IGG route & say legally going through the garbage of a relative of a suspect & running their DNA? I hope that makes sense. I just see it as the same thing but less leg work, unless I’m blind to some other aspect, which is highly likely. TIA!

 

[girlhasnoname]

The argument is essentially--how is law enforcement allowed to obtain your DNA? There are already a number of legal ways they're allowed to do that. The tricky thing about IGG and what makes it different from any other situation, is that you share so much DNA with family members, if law enforcement has theirs, they essentially have yours. Your family member has given it voluntarily, but you haven't. Are they allowed to have yours that way? That's a 4th Amendment issue the courts will have to decide.

I think where AT went sideways was focusing on the right to privacy of the DNA left at the scene. It's already been litigated and established that law enforcement is allowed to have your DNA that way. She spent way too much time trying to argue that. Expectation of privacy is going to be part of it--but the more people become aware of what IGG is and what can be done, the less they're going to have an expectation of privacy. They know that if their relatives have uploaded DNA, their own DNA is essentially uploaded too.

AT and company looked completely frazzled and defeated by the end of today. Judge Hippler does not tiptoe through the tulips. He was sharp, on point, corrected mistakes when necessary. The man is a beast for details and I'm here for it. Hah

I think his very adamant statement to both the State and the Defense at the end of the hearing suggesting to "err on the side of over disclosing verses under disclosing" had a message that both parties got loud and clear.

I don't believe there is going to be a Franks Hearing. I think the State will shore up the items that AT is going on and on and on about in the next few weeks and the train will keep running on Judge Hippler's timeline.

I foresee many late nights over the next months to come, especially for the Defense.

JMO