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

[arielilane]

I cant imagine that the judge will toss out key evidence.

These cases (in general) are beginning to all sound the same, its a different defendant; however, its the same defense (Defense 101) rules.

There is always a rabbit hole to fall in and as someone stated earlier throw things at the wall and see what sticks.

Feeling bad for the victims’ families who Im sure suffer during court proceedings. Im sure prosecutors warn families of this but it gets to be ridiculous at times.

Trial isn’t until August yet there is an attempt to discredit potential witnesses.

moo

 

[LinasK]

I'm finding it exceptionally hard to believe that PhD Criminology student sets out to commit the 'perfect crime' undetected and purchases his weapon of choice from Amazon. I understand many people agree it's looking that way but how does that jive with the theory of his intention? Makes no sense IMO.

And yet many murderers purchase their murder weapons and cleanup supplies on surveillance cameras at Walmart. We have a running joke about that now when we shop at Walmart.

 

[wendy44]

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!

Yes, it makes perfect sense--<settles in with a doughnut, thank you very much>--and grabbing garbage with DNA on it has gone through the same challenges. Before there was IGG, there was DNA matching and the courts had to decide if it was constitutional to obtain your DNA without a warrant when you throw it out with the trash. Remember that obtaining your DNA via your relatives is done without a warrant.

The courts have accepted that there's standard investigative work that goes into grabbing DNA from the trash. You have cell records, witnesses, whatever--there's a reason you're focused in on that person or family. You're not going to be grabbing garbage of every random person and testing it. With IGG you might have nothing to point to that person--you would never have been prompted to take their garbage and test it. What should be the expectation of privacy there?

 

[LinasK]

Starting with the AT&T warrant (and subsequent CAST report)...

CAST is the new DNA so I'm not surprised the Defense wants that deep-sixed too.

JMO

What does CAST stand for?

 

[arielilane]

@BrianEntin

No decision was made in the Bryan Kohberger pre-trial hearings.Defense is asking for a "Frank's hearing" to argue that a law enforcement officer lied or provided false information to obtain a search warrant.Judge should make decision soon.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/idaho-college-killings/kohberger-to-appear-in-court-as-defense-challenges-dna-evidence/

 

[arielilane]

Idaho Deputy Attorney General Jeff Nye, at Thursday's hearing: "There is no case law anywhere that the state could find, and the defense has not cited any to suggest, that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in DNA found at a crime scene."

What Happens Next​

Hippler took the motions on suppression of evidence under advisement. He also asked the prosecution and defense to send availability in case he decides to hold a Franks hearing.

Bryan Kohberger Idaho murder update: What we learned in latest hearing

New details about the investigation into accused killer Bryan Kohberger were revealed during hearings on Thursday and Friday.

www.newsweek.com

1.24.2025

 

[Vaderman]

Agreed, however AT isn’t consorting with YT mouthpieces to spread misinformation to the public nor leaking evidence via former employees.

Yet

 

[PinkParis2052]

What does CAST stand for?

FBI Cellular Analysis Survey Team (CAST)

 

[LinasK]

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

Having a criminal as a relative??? Just guessing.

 

[LinasK]

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.

Exactly! They have to search the family trees to see which member it could be. Sometimes it's done using newspaper articles and birth/death records, sometimes they find out where someone was living at the time of the crime.

 

[katydid23]

This is really the core of the constitutional argument. You haven't provided your DNA to law enforcement either voluntarily--uploading to a database and opting in, or providing it willingly for an investigation--or involuntarily--you've been convicted of a crime and it's in CODIS, or are required to because of warrant, or you're a suspect already and have abandoned it in the trash, or some other means the courts have already determined to be a legal way to obtain your DNA. But the nature of familial DNA means they have it in a way that doesn't fit into those boxes. The courts are going to have to decide if that's constitutional. They've been working through 4th Amendment issues with DNA for a long time and will have to work through this one too.

A weird analogy comes to mind. If the US Marshalls are looking for a murder suspect and they go to his parents or his brother's house to see if he is hiding there, it is illegal for the family to lie and say he is not there. One cannot hide a wanted family member from LE if they have a warrant for his arrest.

If LE has the suspect's DNA from a murder victim, and they need to look at the family DNA from an ancestry site, in order to arrest the suspect, can the family deter that arrest by blocking it? It seems very similar to the above situation, IMO.

 

[LinasK]

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!

IGG helps them figure out which relatives may be involved. Then they go search the garbage for the DNA match to corroborate what DNA was left at the crime scene. Does that help?

 

[Cool Cats]

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!

I expect cream in some of those doughnuts.

 

[mrjitty]

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.

i get the argument. i just can’t see why i should take it seriously.

obviously there should probably be legislation around the use of this stuff, especially commercially. but i am not going to lose a moments sleep over this use case.

As for AT i think she simply has no good arguments. It was all a shell game.

 

[katydid23]

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.

If LE needs the DNA from a murder suspect they can get a warrant for it by showing Probable Cause.

So if they had the Moscow Killer's DNA from the crime scene, could they maybe obtain a warrant for that unknown DNA, and use that warrant to look through IGG databases?

It seems like it's the same principle. If someone is considered a prime murder suspect because of actual evidence, then the courts will approve the DNA retrieval. Why not use that same type of warrant when building an IGG ?

 

[katydid23]

Yes, it makes perfect sense--<settles in with a doughnut, thank you very much>--and grabbing garbage with DNA on it has gone through the same challenges. Before there was IGG, there was DNA matching and the courts had to decide if it was constitutional to obtain your DNA without a warrant when you throw it out with the trash. Remember that obtaining your DNA via your relatives is done without a warrant.

The courts have accepted that there's standard investigative work that goes into grabbing DNA from the trash. You have cell records, witnesses, whatever--there's a reason you're focused in on that person or family. You're not going to be grabbing garbage of every random person and testing it. With IGG you might have nothing to point to that person-

But the whole point of an FBI IGG search is that they already have some DNA retrieved from a crime scene. So they do have something very specific that points to a specific person. They have the DNA.

So why not allow the FBI to get a warrant for that Familial DNA search? They can show Probable Cause that the DNA from the crime scene was on the victim or on the weapon or from blood left behind, etc.....and that gets them a 'warrant' they can use in the ancestry data sites?

-you would never have been prompted to take their garbage and test it. What should be the expectation of privacy there?

 

[Cool Cats]

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 Golden State Killer Suspect Was Caught Thanks to DNA Info Found Online, Authorities Say

Authorities say Joseph DeAngelo was arrested after a lengthy process of comparing crime-scene DNA to genetic information via the genealogical site GEDmatch

people.com

Thank God there was no problem convicting this criminal sicko using relative's DNA.

The “innovative DNA technology” that authorities say helped them catch California’s notorious Golden State Killer has been revealed as a lengthy process of comparing the murderer’s DNA — found at one of the crime scenes — to genetic profiles that are publicly available via a genealogical website, PEOPLE confirms.

The Golden State Killer Suspect Was Caught Thanks to DNA Info Found Online, Authorities Say​

Authorities say Joseph DeAngelo was arrested after a lengthy process of comparing crime-scene DNA to genetic information via the genealogical site GED match

 

[Cool Cats]

If I had a cousin who was a killer and the police got his/her DNA from the crime scene then found it was related to my own DNA on 23 and Me and then through my own DNA LE was able to trace my DNA to my killer cousin then investigated that my cousin was not in prison but was in the area of the murder etc....

And then arrested him/her thanks to my DNA donation I would call it a win win and probably saved other lives.

I do not hear one person on here complaining about all the information all these online companies are selling about us online.

2 Cents

 

[sunshineray]

New info... from AT... KG's dog was found in a room with an open door.

Not sure what her point was....

But that poor pup. Obedient. Waiting for permission, no doubt...

JMO

Love </3

 

[INfisherman]

I expect cream in some of those doughnuts.

<sigh> Someone sounds as spoiled as my squirrels are!