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

[Nila Aella]

Othram takes the sample and creates a profile using genome sequencing. I don't know how that changes the size, if at all. The FBI was holding back the notes primarily on principle, in my opinion. They saw it as an investigative technique not subject to discovery. And there have been court cases already, cited by Judge Judge, that back them up on this. I think eventually they did turn over materials after JJ reviewed them, but I don't think we know what was turned over.

The bottom line though--the IGG and the direct matching of the DNA on the sheath led to the same person. The proof in the accuracy of the IGG is the fact that when the DNA on the sheath was compared to BK, it was a match. The FBI is being secretive about the IGG because they don't want to lose one of the best investigative techniques they've ever had. The defense is playing up the secrecy surrounding the IGG in preparation for their 4th Amendment challenge. That's all that's going on here.
JMO

How would showing their work cause them to lose their ability to use this fantastic investigative technique. IGG will not go away if they show their work.

They went into websites that they are not supposed to use.
Maybe that has something to do with the secrecy?

ALL JMO

 

[wendy44]

How would showing their work cause them to lose their ability to use this fantastic investigative technique. IGG will not go away if they show their work.

They went into websites that they are not supposed to use.
Maybe that has something to do with the secrecy?

ALL JMO

Like I said--I think they did it mostly on principle and precedent. They consider it not subject to discovery and want to keep it secret. There are other cases where they've done the same. I have no doubt they didn't want the defense to know they used databases they weren't supposed to.
JMO

 

[Boxer]

How would showing their work cause them to lose their ability to use this fantastic investigative technique. IGG will not go away if they show their work.

They went into websites that they are not supposed to use.
Maybe that has something to do with the secrecy?

ALL JMO

Are you an advocate of ATs attempt to get the DNA thrown out?
Othram is an opt in sevice. What she is saying is that Opt-In people's DNA reveals their relatives, and police whittled down their suspect pool from the sheath DNA.
If BKs father, or cousin or BKs himself did a DNA test that might show up. But still not conclusive.
A direct DNA sample needed to match. His arrest was supported by the PC, then his buccal sample was a match.

 

[Nila Aella]

Are you an advocate of ATs attempt to get the DNA thrown out?

What?
I am an advocate of transparency for any defendant.
I do not agree with the secrecy.
Show the work.
Then move on.
JMO

Othram is an opt in sevice.

I wasn't talking about Othram.
The FBI used MyHerit which does not share with LE. People who chose that sight might have chosen it for that specific reason. Privacy.
Per the P argument opt in/out and policies mean nothing. And we just have to take their word for it that they did not do anything wrong.
JMO

What she is saying is that Opt-In people's DNA reveals their relatives, and police whittled down their suspect pool from the sheath DNA.
If BKs father, or cousin or BKs himself did a DNA test that might show up. But still not conclusive.
A direct DNA sample needed to match. His arrest was supported by the PC

Was it?
JMO

, then his buccal sample was a match.

 

[CKS]

What?
I am an advocate of transparency for any defendant.
I do not agree with the secrecy.
Show the work.
Then move on.
JMO

All MOO

Bingo! I think it's important we have transparency in any court case let alone a DP case.

Quite frankly the longer they keep it a secret the more sus it looks to me.

I'm guessing if any of you were in BK shoes you'd want LE or the FBI to show their work. Yet somehow for BK it doesn't matter?


Just my opinion.

 

[mrjitty]

Like I said--I think they did it mostly on principle and precedent. They consider it not subject to discovery and want to keep it secret. There are other cases where they've done the same. I have no doubt they didn't want the defense to know they used databases they weren't supposed to.
JMO

Do you have a cite to any of them? i’d be interested to read. TIA

 

[Boxer]

How does AT know they used MyHeri?

 

[Boxer]

How would showing their work cause them to lose their ability to use this fantastic investigative technique. IGG will not go away if they show their work.

They went into websites that they are not supposed to use.
Maybe that has something to do with the secrecy?

ALL JMO

Not supposed to.
Can you point to the law?

 

[schooling]

But the dates the warrants cover don't match what Dateline reported (that a purchase was made in April 2022 while warrants for Amazon were reported to cover a week in March 2022 and a fall period beginning in Nov 2022.) Also the info sent to LE because of the warrants was reportedly received in July 2023 months after Dateline reported what it reported.

Idaho authorities probe Amazon 'click activity' for knives possibly connected to college killings

The murder weapon in the quadruple killings has not been found.

abcnews.go.com

NBC's Dateline could be wrong or ABC's reporting could be wrong. Or both. I don't think we know. But I've not seen multiple reports from NBC of the Dateline finding that was purportedly leaked by anonymous sources close to LE.
MOO

Link to the Search Warrant via the Seal and Redact filing

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR29-22-2805/090823-Order-to-Seal-and-Redact-Amazon.pdf

During last hearing defense revealed that something prosecutors heard at the Grand Jury hearing was used in a search warrant on an Amazon account and that LE knew exactly what to ask for on there.

Quick Present Day Timeline
April 26 2023 - First report of Grand Jury sending out subpoenas
April 27 - May 7th - We have to assume that LE first learns about this Amazon order in this window.
May 8, 2023 - LE obtains a search warrant for Amazon
May 10 2023 - LE serves that warrant to Amazon
May 16 2023 - Kohberger indicted
May 18 2023 - Dateline anounces that Kohberger ordered the knife from Amazon and that LE had proof
January 2025 - AT argues to suppress the Amazon order information. You have to assume that whatever it is it's damaging (IMO). During this process she mentions that LE knew exactly what they were looking for. And then the judge makes a analogy where he clumsily swaps out the knife for a TV (MOO)

I think this makes it more likely than not that Dateline had a knowledgeable source for their reporting of "LE had evidence Kohberger ordered a knife from Amazon in April 2022" (paraphrasing from memory)

Timeline of Amazon warrants
- The Second Date Range: November 1,2022 - December 6,2022.
This one is pretty easy. They were trying to see if BK purchased anything in preparation of or to cover up the crime. MOO

The First Date Range: March 20, 2022 - March 30,2022
That LE knows he checked out on March 30th. And they want to know what was in his cart the previous 10 days. Why March 30th? Because they probably have the receipt for the knife and want to know if anything nefarious was added to the cart and then taken out before checkout. MOO

And if you order something on Amazon Prime it's free 2 day delivery. If you order on the 30th when is it most likely to come? April 1. We have one day delivery but many places don't. MOO

April 1 aligns directly with Dateline's reporting. They probably had that date but wanted to cover their source. MOO

So IMO opinion Kohberger purchased the knife on March 30,2022. Received it around April 1-3, 2022. LE has the receipt. And IMO someone from his family showed them some kind of proof of purchase which allowed them to be so surgical with their windows.

MOO

 

[Nila Aella]

Not supposed to.
Can you point to the law?

I didn't say it was illegal.
J Nye pointed that out.
The Judge did have questions about blanket statements (footnote) that negate a policy.
Just a policy violation.
No big deal.
No reason to hide the work then.
JMO

 

[mickey2942]

I can attest that "two day Amazon delivery" is a joke in rural areas. The USPS scans it as "delivered" when it gets to the local post office. This started about a decade ago, so USPS keeps the Amazon contract for "two day delivery". UPS does the same thing.

It drove me insane to get a notice. "Your package has been delivered" by Amazon, and it wasn't in my mailbox. Until I read about the "shell game" online.

 

[Boxer]

I didn't say it was illegal.
J Nye pointed that out.
The Judge did have questions about blanket statements (footnote) that negate a policy.
Just a policy violation.
No big deal.
No reason to hide the work then.
JMO

Also no reason to keep after it unless you are a defense attorney.

 

[NoeticSoul]

I can attest that "two day Amazon delivery" is a joke in rural areas. The USPS scans it as "delivered" when it gets to the local post office. This started about a decade ago, so USPS keeps the Amazon contract for "two day delivery". UPS does the same thing.

It drove me insane to get a notice. "Your package has been delivered" by Amazon, and it wasn't in my mailbox. Until I read about the "shell game" online.

Its the exact same here in northern Michigan. Drives me nuts!

 

[Boxer]

MOO His family knows he needs to be incarcerated for life.

 

[Arkay]

Also no reason to keep after it unless you are a defense attorney.

The truest words.

So many of us have been saying this since way back when we first heard about BK being a match for the snap DNA.

This is not AT’s first defense case. IMO, she and her team know full well how IGG works, what the odds in the octillions mean, and that this proves Bryan was there, touched the snap, and is 1000% guilty.

Of course she is attempting to get the evidence thrown out. That’s her job. She knows full well that this is the key evidence. In court I think the chain of custody will be proven by the prosecution, who really needn’t tell it to the world at this juncture.

DNA matching in today’s world is indisputable. It’s not lipstick on the collar, hand in the cookie jar or any of the old-timey excuses and denials that could be made back then.

It reminds me a bit of the old Shaggy song, “It Wasn’t Me.” Caught red-handed and still denying.

Judge Hippler isn’t falling for it, going by his “every day and twice on Sundays” remark, as well as rebutting the defense that a knife sheath found by the body of a knifed-to-death victim is VERY relevant. That stymied AT for awhile.

JMO

 

[DizzyB]

Like I said--I think they did it mostly on principle and precedent. They consider it not subject to discovery and want to keep it secret. There are other cases where they've done the same. I have no doubt they didn't want the defense to know they used databases they weren't supposed to.
JMO

Yup, the BK relative that uploaded their sample to the database is the one that had an expectation of privacy. Not BK. He wasn’t in that database, so he has no standing. LE might have violated TOS, but not the law.

 

[MassGuy]

New Documents. Nothing exciting.

• 02/10/2025 Motion to Extend States Rebuttal Expert Deadline
• 02/10/2025 Motion to Seal Exhibit S-1 RE Motion to Extend States Rebuttal Expert Disclosure Deadline
• 02/11/2025 Motion to Seal Exhibit S-1 RE States Response to Defendants 22nd Supplemental Request for Discover
• 02/11/2025 States Response to Defendants 22nd Supplemental Request for Discovery
• 02/12/2025 Order Extending States Rebuttal Expert Deadline
• 02/12/2025 Order Sealing Exhibit S-1 RE States Motion to Extend States Rebuttal Expert Disclosure Deadline
• 02/12/2025 Order Sealing Exhibit S-1 RE States Response to Defendants 22nd Supplemental Request for Discovery

 

[Gigiky]

Because it probably did. And she knew by saying that people would seize on it. That was the entire point of the hearing; changing the narrative.

Othram's process probably does double the amount of data or something close to what she was alleging. It just has no bearing on the original sample which was ultimately compared directly to BK. The defense isn't alleging that, but you are.

The point was about the IGG process itself, as she wanted to understand how exactly it was done. It'll go nowhere, and Franks will be denied. I'd bet the farm on it.

I always follow your posts very closely because I feel like you are very dedicated and well informed.
I wonder if you are an Attorney? I also hope you are right and the FRANKS will be denied.
I feel like we are all waiting for the Per verbal paint to dry. Ugh!

 

[Megnut]

I submit that the concept of 'show your work' is a magical construct of AT's. She's got some people looking for a lost thing that never existed in the first place.

You could tell she was taking on water when, when asked by the judge to clarify a critical point (DNA on a  knife sheath, in the bed of and next to/under the body of slain victim), she took a long draw on a stall cigarette, and went global, talking about legalities and privacy rights and what sort of theoretical justice system we want as a society. Word salad with oil, vinaigrette, sprinkles, sparklers and a full bowl, no lettuce.

Three metaphors in one paragraph which is MY metaphor for a sinking salad on a sinking ship going up in smoke from an ashtray that, from the outset, was never going to float.

None of it wipes his DNA off the sheath but it's fun to watch her try.

JMO

 

[wendy44]

Do you have a cite to any of them? i’d be interested to read. TIA

This is the case that was cited by the prosecution and by Judge Judge:

https://meshbasestorage.blob.core.windows.net/dnacontainer/Green.pdf

This case also cites two other relevant cases that deal with what falls under discovery/what is material to the defendant's guilt or innocence.
JMO