4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #99

[mrjitty]

If that were the case, the breach belongs to the company for violating its own TOS, and grievance belongs to individuals who have issue with the company. BK has no standing in any of that.

JMO

Exactly.

Privity of contract. BK typically cannot sue when he is not a party to the TOS agreement. Similarly his relatives have no contract with law enforcement. Best case their remedy is civil va the platform.

Short version the TOS does not grant any rights.

Privity of contract - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Swansee]

Could you link the source to Kristi interview please. Kristi is Kayley's sister? I forget when and who did these interviews.

Steve and Kristi Gonçalves are Kaylee's parents. Kaylee's sister we've seen in the news is called Alivea. Kaylee also has a brother named Steven who has much more rarely been interviewed, as well as a half-sister on her dad's side.

 

[jepop]

Steve and Kristi Gonçalves are Kaylee's parents. Kaylee's sister we've seen in the news is called Alivea. Kaylee also has a brother named Steven who has much more rarely been interviewed, as well as a half-sister on her dad's side.

Thank you for that @Swansee.

 

[Nila Aella]

Could you link the source to Kristi interview please. Kristi is Kayley's sister? I forget when and who did these interviews.

Unfortunately no - FN (not TOS)
The articles about the interview focus on the investigation/JD calls and support.
It was an early interview with the parents of KG 2022.
JMO

 

[jepop]

Dbm, not approved source

 

[Megnut]

For your discerning ear, listen to AT swallow the alphabet.

Freudian stop?

1:30.50

Quoting myself to adjust the timestamp. 1:31.50

 

[SpiderFalcon]

For your discerning ear, listen to AT swallow the alphabet.

Freudian stop?

1:30.50

Snicker, snicker. If you watch the judge's screen, when she does that, he's muttering something, and I'm pretty sure he's trying to SHUT HER UP. IMO. Less than 2 minutes later, he states the SPECTACULAR "every day and twice on Sunday". I say again, snicker, snicker......

 

[mrjitty]

Quoting myself to adjust the timestamp. 1:31.50

Whoops!

 

[Jade]

SBMFF BBM

First of all, it's crucial to remember that the individual in question is the accused, not a convicted killer. Innocent until proven guilty, as the saying goes. Second, why exactly are the doubts about the use of Touch DNA considered outdated? What specific advancements since 2012 have magically transformed doubts about Touch DNA evidence into something completely irrelevant for this case? If you can elucidate these points clearly, that would be splendid, preferably without using ducks or other feathered species as analogy. Here are some more recent references that don't seem to differ much from the one in Wikipedia, which was provided as a widely accepted source. However, I'm more than happy to dive into highly technical sources if you prefer. 1 2 3 4 5

Even with all due scrutiny confirming that the DNA on the sheath belongs to BK, the discussion then meanders into the realm of logic and dissipates there due to the absence of a murder weapon. It's like trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle with half the pieces missing—no amount of squinting will make the picture any clearer. JMO

First of all, innocent until proven guilty is not a saying but a legal term regarding the defendants fundamental Constutional right to due process in a court of law.

It means that the Prosecution carries the burden of proof. So in a criminal trial the accused does not have to prove their innocence.

Not relevant outside a court room and certainly not to a crime forum where the terms of service are the guiding rules.

No weapon; no problem, imo.

Luckily they have the murder weapon’s special companion - the sheath the knife arrived in with BK on it.

On a specially designed for killing knife sheath in the bed with the dead girls.

BK’s dna was where he was not known much less invited into the house in the wee hours while the tenants were in bed dozing.

Example recent case on WS Jason Chen killed Jasmine Pace knife never found it took the jury an hour to give him life.

Much will be revealed in trial just hang on.

All imo

 

[jepop]

First of all, innocent until proven guilty is not a saying but a legal term regarding the defendants fundamental Constutional right to due process in a court of law.

It means that the Prosecution carries the burden of proof. So in a criminal trial the accused does not have to prove their innocence.

Not relevant outside a court room and certainly not to a crime forum where the terms of service are the guiding rules.

No weapon; no problem, imo.

Luckily they have the murder weapon’s special companion - the sheath the knife arrived in with BK on it.

On a specially designed for killing knife sheath in the bed with the dead girls.

BK’s dna was where he was not known much less invited into the house in the wee hours while the tenants were in bed dozing.

Example recent case on WS Jason Chen killed Jasmine Pace knife never found it took the jury an hour to give him life.

Much will be revealed in trial just hang on.

All imo

It's a joy to me, to see/read you on here.

 

[Boxer]

The FBI knowingly obtaining a non-suspect's DNA sequence under false pretenses, when an expectation of privacy exists both explicitly in the genealogy website's UA and implicitly (DNA is PHI, after all), is not a good look for the FBI at a minimum. I can certainly see a judge throwing all of it out, particularly with the FBI's reputation of late. In my view, this would be akin to the FBI posing as a patient at a doctor's office, covertly downloading all patient health records from said office, and then trying to submit one of them to a court because it had retroactive evidentiary value in a case that was only tangentially germane to it. The only difference in the analogy is a mere technicality; that is, that genealogy sites aren't (yet) considered covered HIPAA entities or partners therein. There will be arguments heard on that in the future I'm sure, and this case could be the catalyst.

JMO.

All to say, the defense is looking for a technicality to get him off. He is guilty and it will be deeply unjust if prosecutors are not allowed to use an opt-in database because the opt-in people have relatives who are not opted in.

 

[SortaSleuthy]

No, it is clear cut, hence the skepticism from the judge. I've been worried about evidence being excluded from some of the cases I've followed, but there's nothing remotely concerning to me here. He had zero expectation of privacy, and it's not like his DNA was present on the sites law enforcement used. They simply used a technique that is against those companies' policies, but totally legal.

Taylor said police never sought warrants to analyze the DNA found at the crime scene, nor did they get warrants to analyze the DNA of potential relatives that had been submitted to genealogy databases. Then, she said, the FBI violated its own Investigative Genetic Genealogy interim policy by running the data through a database that wasn’t approved under the policy.

Deputy Attorney General Jeff Nye, one of the prosecutors, said there is nothing unconstitutional about the use of IGG. Kohberger isn’t asserting that he provided his own DNA to a genealogy site and then had it misused, Nye said, and defendants don’t have any right to privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.

The U.S. Department of Justice policy for IGG doesn’t exclude other legal investigative techniques, Nye said. Even if FBI investigators used an online genealogy database that wasn’t included in the policy, at most that might be a violation of the terms of service of the online database — not a violation of Kohberger’s rights.

Bryan Kohberger defense wants most evidence thrown out in Idaho murders trial [Update]

Attorneys for Bryan Kohberger, the Monroe County man charged with the murders of four University of Idaho students, are asking a judge to throw out most of the evidence in the case.

www.citizensvoice.com

Bravo!

 

[PinkParis2052]

Who's Kristi?

Oh good. I saw that someone answered. But just in case Kristi is Kaylee's mother.

 

[al66pine]

You’re not misremembering. He was pulled over for entering the intersection too soon, before oncoming traffic had exited the intersection & turned on the red light.

ETA Megnut beat me to it.

@INfisherman
Thanks for responding.
And yep, Megnut is super speedy.

@Megnut TYVM for your post w link.

 

[MassGuy]

SBMFF BBM

First of all, it's crucial to remember that the individual in question is the accused, not a convicted killer. Innocent until proven guilty, as the saying goes. Second, why exactly are the doubts about the use of Touch DNA considered outdated? What specific advancements since 2012 have magically transformed doubts about Touch DNA evidence into something completely irrelevant for this case? If you can elucidate these points clearly, that would be splendid, preferably without using ducks or other feathered species as analogy. Here are some more recent references that don't seem to differ much from the one in Wikipedia, which was provided as a widely accepted source. However, I'm more than happy to dive into highly technical sources if you prefer. 1 2 3 4 5

Even with all due scrutiny confirming that the DNA on the sheath belongs to BK, the discussion then meanders into the realm of logic and dissipates there due to the absence of a murder weapon. It's like trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle with half the pieces missing—no amount of squinting will make the picture any clearer. JMO

Testing is much more advanced now; they are able to generate complete profiles (like that on the sheath), when that used to be impossible. Like any new technology (like DNA when it first came about), there is initial skepticism in regards to its validity.

The downside of this more sensitive testing, is that they find more of it now at crime scenes. Who among us hasn't followed a case where they find unidentified touch DNA all over the place, and the defense points to it as belonging to the real killer?

Here, like in that case I cited last night, there is no concern the DNA on the sheath belongs to anyone other than the killer.

In that one, they looked into the background of the suspect who left DNA on the victim's pocket, and the case kept getting stronger.

Here, the exact same thing happened. The rest of the evidence couldn't possibly fit any better. There is no legitimate reason for that sheath snap to contain DNA from anyone other than the killer.

You do not need a murder weapon to secure a murder conviction. You don't even need a body to secure a murder conviction (cases without a body have higher conviction rates that cases with a body, as those cases tend to be very strong).

The vast majority of the cases I've followed that have resulted in convictions, do not have a murder weapon. That's because the first thing most killers do is dispose of it. Here it wouldn't surprise me if they hit the jackpot though, and find a purchase record of a Kbar combat knife that is now missing. Not that they need it.

No squinting involved here; just don't look away from the obvious, and you'll see it.

 

[schooling]

Huh? We're getting into he-breathed-only-killers-breathe territory here.

MOO

if that’s the broad-end bottom of the “Hierarchy of Quadruple Murderer Needs” Id imagine that DNA on the murder-weapon-holder is somewhere near the top.

MOO

 

[Charlot123]

There is zero chance of that. You do not need a warrant to test DNA that is left at a crime scene, and the FBI merely violated the terms of service of two genealogy websites. It's completely legal for them to have done that, and the judge made no secret that he was skeptical of the defense arguments here. I honestly don't think that could have possibly gone any worse for them.

This is no different than what has been done in hundreds of murder cases now.

DNA laws are a budding area. What you call a “website”, IRL is “a major commercial company of international location”.

When registering on such sites, one signs an agreement. All of it was less organized in the past. But even “DNA inheritance” will eventually be regulated. Ownership of information will be entered into wills.

From the standpoint of “genetic genealogy”, there is a term “guardianship of DNA”. So I have no question about swabbing any DNA from that party house. The question is, where these DNA s are legally viewed as “guardianship” by the Feds, and where, not.

Here is an interesting issue. When Anne Taylor asked about two other male DNAs found at the house, she was answered that they were not found in CODIS.

So next question would be, why can’t the relatives be searched for them at the same sites that they used to look for BK’s “DNA relatives”? Otherwise, it puts BK in an unfair situation, doesn’t it?

This is a huge problem. Not the DNA, but the “guardianship” of all swabs ought to have been defined the same, “equal”, way.

The judge at BK’s process has said something along the lines of, customers who make DNA open for relationship comparison, why should they care if someone compares them with the suspect? MOO - the answer can’t be that nonchalant. The judge may have not heard about a recent hack into a major commercial DNA site. After that, the answer is, no, some customers would 100% object, IMHO, to any random comparisons.

The customers pay to a company of choice for regulation of DNA storage, processing and collection of their genetic data. Monthly maintenance of trees is expensive. From time to time, one gets messages from unknown relatives with additional information (this is what one pays for, theoretically, chance of getting new information. ) These “website” as you call it is a paid DNA meetup, where only relatives are invited. Unless someone opts in for other kinds of comparison.

Nowadays it is becoming a huge issue. I foresee that in the future it all will be regulated way more strictly.

 

[Balthazar]

Steve and Kristi Gonçalves are Kaylee's parents. Kaylee's sister we've seen in the news is called Alivea. Kaylee also has a brother named Steven who has much more rarely been interviewed, as well as a half-sister on her dad's side.

Actually KG was the middle child of 5. You are right about the older sister and older brother and the half sister. There are also 2 younger sisters. One was only 17 in 2022.

 

[Balthazar]

DNA laws are a budding area. What you call a “website”, IRL is “a major commercial company of international location”.

When registering on such sites, one signs an agreement. All of it was less organized in the past. But even “DNA inheritance” will eventually be regulated. Ownership of information will be entered into wills.

From the standpoint of “genetic genealogy”, there is a term “guardianship of DNA”. So I have no question about swabbing any DNA from that party house. The question is, where these DNA s are legally viewed as “guardianship” by the Feds, and where, not.

Here is an interesting issue. When Anne Taylor asked about two other male DNAs found at the house, she was answered that they were not found in CODIS.

So next question would be, why can’t the relatives be searched for them at the same sites that they used to look for BK’s “DNA relatives”? Otherwise, it puts BK in an unfair situation, doesn’t it?

This is a huge problem. Not the DNA, but the “guardianship” of all swabs ought to have been defined the same, “equal”, way.

The judge at BK’s process has said something along the lines of, customers who make DNA open for relationship comparison, why should they care if someone compares them with the suspect? MOO - the answer can’t be that nonchalant. The judge may have not heard about a recent hack into a major commercial DNA site. After that, the answer is, no, some customers would 100% object, IMHO, to any random comparisons.

The customers pay to a company of choice for regulation of DNA storage, processing and collection of their genetic data. Monthly maintenance of trees is expensive. From time to time, one gets messages from unknown relatives with additional information (this is what one pays for, theoretically, chance of getting new information. ) These “website” as you call it is a paid DNA meetup, where only relatives are invited. Unless someone opts in for other kinds of comparison.

Nowadays it is becoming a huge issue. I foresee that in the future it all will be regulated way more strictly.

It is incredibly concerning because that major hack might have allowed most anything to happen. How is the consumer to know if their DNA data was tampered with or not or even worse, used to build a bioweapon? The issue is significant enough that in 2019 the Department of Defense issued an order to stop the use of these consumer ancestry DNA tests by military. personnel.

Pentagon Leaders Tell Troops to Stop Using Mail-In Genealogy DNA Kits

U.S. troops are being advised to steer clear of genetic-testing kits over what Pentagon leaders say is a growing concern.

www.military.com

Why is this such a serious issue? Read here:

Exclusive: Pentagon warns military members DNA kits pose ‘personal and operational risks’

The Pentagon is advising members of the military not to use consumer DNA kits, saying the information collected by private companies could pose a security risk, according to a memo co-signed by the Defense Department’s top intelligence official.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Charlot123]

Taylor said police never sought warrants to analyze the DNA found at the crime scene, nor did they get warrants to analyze the DNA of potential relatives that had been submitted to genealogy databases. Then, she said, the FBI violated its own Investigative Genetic Genealogy interim policy by running the data through a database that wasn’t approved under the policy.

Deputy Attorney General Jeff Nye, one of the prosecutors, said there is nothing unconstitutional about the use of IGG. Kohberger isn’t asserting that he provided his own DNA to a genealogy site and then had it misused, Nye said, and defendants don’t have any right to privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.

The U.S. Department of Justice policy for IGG doesn’t exclude other legal investigative techniques, Nye said. Even if FBI investigators used an online genealogy database that wasn’t included in the policy, at most that might be a violation of the terms of service of the online database — not a violation of Kohberger’s rights.

Bryan Kohberger defense wants most evidence thrown out in Idaho murders trial [Update]

Attorneys for Bryan Kohberger, the Monroe County man charged with the murders of four University of Idaho students, are asking a judge to throw out most of the evidence in the case.

www.citizensvoice.com

RSBM

The FBI, IMHO, is not that culpable but they might have unwittingly opened the door to others, non-friendly, entities. And, they have also created a problem for themselves. Anne Taylor mentioned two other male DNAs being found in the blood. The answer was, their profiles were not found in the CODIS. One can read between the lines, but this undermines the validity of the results obtained for BK. His search was not limited, and the other ones, are.

That is the stumbling block for this case.

Jeff Nye may wish to formulate his words better. A well-known case.

23andMe user data targeting Ashkenazi Jews leaked online

A database that has been shared on dark web forums and viewed by NBC News has a list of 999,999 people who allegedly have used the service.

www.nbcnews.com

The hackers, I hope, will be arrested, but the issue is, that they hacked into a small number of accounts and followed the matches, and if is, theoretically, IGG.

So one can’t broadly say, legal or not. There are many limitations, and in general, DNA laws are long overdue.