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

[Rolypolyoly]

Bryan Kohberger case: Idaho makes key move on firing squad executions

Idaho lawmakers have advanced a bill to make the state's newly revived firing squad its main method of execution as the quadruple murder trial of aspiring criminologist and alleged co-ed killer Bryan Kohberger approaches.

One of the country's leading experts on capital punishment, Fordham University professor Deborah Denno, has also argued that the firing squad is an effective and humane method of execution.

The bill advances as prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Kohberger in the stabbing deaths of four University of Idaho students: 21-year-olds Madison Mogen and Kaylee Goncalves and 20-year-olds Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin.

Presently the primary means of execution in Idaho is lethal injection.

Ugh, I hate that this article, whether intentional or not, has given him a name. He is already infamous enough, he shouldn't get to have a killer nickname attributed to him to boost his ego.

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

AT & Company are really sweating the DNA:

<snipped & BBM>
So how did a sheath for a fixed-blade knife get there, and how did Bryan Kohberger’s skin cells allegedly wind up on it if he was not involved? Taylor acknowledged that is the most significant issue ahead at trial. “I mean, that’s the ultimate question that will be before a jury,” Taylor said.

“What does a knife sheath at a scene mean?” Hippler shot back: “If you’re killed with a knife, that probably means a lot.” “It might,” she said.

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news...EqEAgAKgcICjDO9P0KMLKa9gI&utm_content=rundown

Thank you for highlighting this @girlhasnoname …. and to jump into one aspect of that and specifically the following statement:

“I mean, that’s the ultimate question that will be before a jury,” Taylor said.

IMO in more than one occasion in this case I have been slightly confused by some of the defense team statements, etc. If my attorney was speaking similarly, frankly I would prefer they not. But if so I would have preferred a statement like “That will be a question for the jury.” IANAL. MOO

 

[wendy44]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed>
If you would like a link, just ask for a link--it's totally fine to do that. Snip out the statements that you are questioning and ask for a link so the poster can either link or clarify that it's opinion.

A lot of times people don't ask for links because it's something that's been discussed and linked to, but if you missed it, it's fine to ask.
JMO

 

[CKS]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>
All MOO

AT in court recently stated...

When the FBI gets involved, the profile, the test file that's a SNP to use to try to identify somebody is more than twice as big when it gets to the FBI from Othram. We don't know how. We don't have any notes. We don't know who did any of the work. We don't have any lab protocols.

Why won't the prosecution show LE and FBI's work? I'm sorry but I feel like they should have to turn it over.

All MOO

 

[MassGuy]

All MOO

AT in court recently stated...

When the FBI gets involved, the profile, the test file that's a SNP to use to try to identify somebody is more than twice as big when it gets to the FBI from Othram. We don't know how. We don't have any notes. We don't know who did any of the work. We don't have any lab protocols.

Why won't the prosecution show LE and FBI's work? I'm sorry but I feel like they should have to turn it over.

All MOO

That's what the IGG hearing was about; how much the defense is entitled to. Those transcripts should drop any day now.

Again, that's the IGG stuff, and has nothing to do with the original lab work, which was ultimately compared to BK. No one is saying the Idaho crime lab hid their work, or violated protocols or anything.

 

[wendy44]

All MOO

AT in court recently stated...

When the FBI gets involved, the profile, the test file that's a SNP to use to try to identify somebody is more than twice as big when it gets to the FBI from Othram. We don't know how. We don't have any notes. We don't know who did any of the work. We don't have any lab protocols.

Why won't the prosecution show LE and FBI's work? I'm sorry but I feel like they should have to turn it over.

All MOO

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

 

[mickey2942]

BK's attorneys are looking for another "OJ win" or "Casey Anthony" Walk away. It isn't going to happen here. Malign the FBI as much as you want, the techs and agents from Salt Lake City know their stuff, and they were all over this investigation.

This was not some "Boulder City" keystone cop investigation, blundered into a mess by rookies working on Christmas, and managed by attorneys on the scene. (JonBenet Ramsey case).

LEO in Moscow, secured the scene, and contacted FBI immediately. This entire investigation has been worked on by a team of highly trained and experienced law enforcement personnel.

Let BK's attorneys keep jabbing away at windmills, in their Don Quixote quest to free BK. It is pathetic grandstanding, and won't work in Idaho. They continue with their government conspiracy theory to railroad poor BK. That is a poor defense for Idaho jury. BK isn't a local, he comes off as arrogant and unlikeable. He will be convicted.

 

[mrjitty]

In the McStay case which i believe some here followed

1: Touch DNA on the drivers side of the jeep was used to convict the defendant
2. A degraded sample of 4 people, was enhanced using computer modelling and introduced by the defence as the 'real killers'

The defence claimed the 'touch DNA" was "transfer DNA" i suspect that is what might be causing confusion here?

My understanding is touch DNA is used all the time to link perps to the crime scene / weapon

Charles Merritt's DNA Found in McStay Family Car: Search Warrants

Search warrants in the mysterious McStay family murders case were unsealed Wednesday and, among new revelations, the documents said the DNA of the man accused of killing the Fallbrook family four was found in the family’s vehicle.

www.nbcsandiego.com

 

[CKS]

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.

All MOO

So why did AT just recently state they don't have any of what you assume was turned over? I mean she straight up said they don't have it.

All MOO

 

[CKS]

In the McStay case which i believe some here followed

1: Touch DNA on the drivers side of the jeep was used to convict the defendant
2. A degraded sample of 4 people, was enhanced using computer modelling and introduced by the defence as the 'real killers'

The defence claimed the 'touch DNA" was "transfer DNA" i suspect that is what might be causing confusion here?

My understanding is touch DNA is used all the time to link perps to the crime scene / weapon

Charles Merritt's DNA Found in McStay Family Car: Search Warrants

Search warrants in the mysterious McStay family murders case were unsealed Wednesday and, among new revelations, the documents said the DNA of the man accused of killing the Fallbrook family four was found in the family’s vehicle.

www.nbcsandiego.com

All MOO

And I imagine the prosecution and LE showed their work and how they came to the conclusion. Don't you think?

 

[MassGuy]

All MOO

And I imagine the prosecution and LE showed their work and how they came to the conclusion. Don't you think?

Of course, and they will here. They have to show all their lab work, how the testing was performed/evidence collected, etc.

IGG is a completely different thing, and you continue to conflate the two. Why?

 

[wendy44]

All MOO

So why did AT just recently state they don't have any of what you assume was turned over? I mean she straight up said they don't have it.

All MOO

She could not have filed a motion for Franks without at least some of the material the FBI had. She needed those details to make the 4th Amendment claim. It's just all been under seal/in closed hearings.
JMO

 

[Balthazar]

Explosive new DNA evidence that could see Bryan Kohberger walk free

Murder suspect Bryan Kohberger's defense attorneys made a stunning claim in court that threatens to upend the prosecution against him for the murders of four students.

www.dailymail.co.uk

The criminology student's lawyers claimed blood from an unknown man was found on a handrail in the victims' home and another's DNA was found on a glove outside.

There was a party there earlier.
All it would take was someone with a minor bloody nose and another person who dropped a glove.
My bet is that they didn't test the dna of all the males at the party -- but that said males have solid alibis.
This article can thus be taken with the proverbial grain, aka slow news day ?
Still believe LE have the right man in custody.
Omo.

At the very minimum, IMO, the blood on the glove found by CSI on Nov. 20, 2022 should be examined and if it is partial DNA, well, CSI labs across the USA have used partial DNA samples as a lead for decades (link proving this further down.) If I were on the jury, I would want to see the glove and see where the blood was found and know the results of testing. Partial DNA is NOT an excuse for not thoroughly investigating the blood on the glove nor the blood on the bannister. JMO.

"In the new filing, the defense notes, “by December 17, 2022, lab analysts were aware of two additional males’ DNA within the house where the deceased were located.”

Lab analysts discovered DNA for another unknown man on a glove found outside the residence on November 20, 2022, the filing states."

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/25/us/b...the new filing, the,, 2022, the filing states.

About LE using partial DNA samples as a lead to find perpetrators:

https://www.uniteddataconnect.com/partial-match-dna-cases

Partial DNA matching has been used in the US since 2002:

Thomas, Laura --- "Nothing to Hide, Something to Fear?: The Use of Partial DNA Matching in Criminal Investigation" [2006] JlLawInfoSci 5; (2006) 17 Journal of Law, Information and Science 76

"When DNA is left at a crime scene the technique can be used in combination with a DNA database or a mass screening to ‘track down’ the posited offender,<a name="fnB2" href="Thomas, Laura --- "Nothing to Hide, Something to Fear?: The Use of Partial DNA Matching in Criminal Investigation" [2006] JlLawInfoSci 5; (2006) 17 Journal of Law, Information and Science 76">[2]</a> usually when more traditional investigative techniques have failed. In the United Kingdom and the United States the technique has been used in criminal investigations since 2002 and has led to some spectacular successes in solving violent crimes, including in cold cases that would otherwise have remained unsolved. Part One of this article describes the science behind the partial DNA matching technique and ways that it can be used in criminal investigations."

All JMO.

 

[Charlot123]

blood and print evidence from a party house..a super well known party house does not provide reasonable doubt and does not negate the facts. The prosecution will prove their case with or without this extra evidence. mOO

But see, the sole fact that it was “a super well known party house” opens so many versions. And they are not “conspiracies”, it is Occam’s razor. LE says, “come on, it is a well-known house, everyone knew it, could walk in”, and that becomes their weakest point.

I remember the early article and the phrase dropped by either the U, or LE, something along the lines of, “maybe they didn’t attack the victims, maybe they attacked the house.” I didn’t understand what it meant, tbh. But now, having read about the super well-known party house and watched the dashcam recordings, I see that indeed, it was well-known. Why did anyone need to even stalk it?

And now they’ve destroyed it. And it is a potential DP trial that hasn’t yet started. What gives?

 

[wendy44]

In the McStay case which i believe some here followed

1: Touch DNA on the drivers side of the jeep was used to convict the defendant
2. A degraded sample of 4 people, was enhanced using computer modelling and introduced by the defence as the 'real killers'

The defence claimed the 'touch DNA" was "transfer DNA" i suspect that is what might be causing confusion here?

My understanding is touch DNA is used all the time to link perps to the crime scene / weapon

Charles Merritt's DNA Found in McStay Family Car: Search Warrants

Search warrants in the mysterious McStay family murders case were unsealed Wednesday and, among new revelations, the documents said the DNA of the man accused of killing the Fallbrook family four was found in the family’s vehicle.

www.nbcsandiego.com

I did not think they would be able to convince me, much less a jury in this case. But when the prosecution laid it all out, especially the timeline with the bank accounts, it was very clear what happened. With the McStays, the defendant at least had some plausible excuse for his DNA being there. There's no plausible reason right now, that we've seen, for BK's DNA being on a sheath in that house.
JMO

 

[Jade]

All MOO

AT in court recently stated...

When the FBI gets involved, the profile, the test file that's a SNP to use to try to identify somebody is more than twice as big when it gets to the FBI from Othram. We don't know how. We don't have any notes. We don't know who did any of the work. We don't have any lab protocols.

Why won't the prosecution show LE and FBI's work? I'm sorry but I feel like they should have to turn it over.

All MOO

AT comes off as incompetent in that quote. Did we get a look at BK’s face when he heard that? He is going to need to assist his defense in basics of crimes scene investigation, imo.

Lab protocols are standard and doesn't the who, how and notes go to trial so it can asked and answered under oath in front of the jury?



All imo

 

[MassGuy]

At the very minimum, IMO, the blood on the glove found by CSI on Nov. 20, 2022 should be examined and if it is partial DNA, well, CSI labs across the USA have used partial DNA samples as a lead for decades (link proving this further down.) If I were on the jury, I would want to see the glove and see where the blood was found and know the results of testing. Partial DNA is NOT an excuse for not thoroughly investigating the blood on the glove nor the blood on the bannister. JMO.

"In the new filing, the defense notes, “by December 17, 2022, lab analysts were aware of two additional males’ DNA within the house where the deceased were located.”

Lab analysts discovered DNA for another unknown man on a glove found outside the residence on November 20, 2022, the filing states."

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/25/us/bryan-kohberger-idaho-killings-dna-filing/index.html#:~:text=In the new filing, the,, 2022, the filing states.

About LE using partial DNA samples as a lead to find perpetrators:

https://www.uniteddataconnect.com/partial-match-dna-cases

Partial DNA matching has been used in the US since 2002:

Thomas, Laura --- "Nothing to Hide, Something to Fear?: The Use of Partial DNA Matching in Criminal Investigation" [2006] JlLawInfoSci 5; (2006) 17 Journal of Law, Information and Science 76

"When DNA is left at a crime scene the technique can be used in combination with a DNA database or a mass screening to ‘track down’ the posited offender,<a name="fnB2" href="Thomas, Laura --- "Nothing to Hide, Something to Fear?: The Use of Partial DNA Matching in Criminal Investigation" [2006] JlLawInfoSci 5; (2006) 17 Journal of Law, Information and Science 76">[2]</a> usually when more traditional investigative techniques have failed. In the United Kingdom and the United States the technique has been used in criminal investigations since 2002 and has led to some spectacular successes in solving violent crimes, including in cold cases that would otherwise have remained unsolved. Part One of this article describes the science behind the partial DNA matching technique and ways that it can be used in criminal investigations."

All JMO.

You're conflating a partial match, with a partial profile, which are two very different things.

A partial match from a complete profile, means that person is related to the contributor. That's what those articles are discussing, and how IGG works.

A partial profile is very different, as the genetic material within that DNA is not complete. It can never be matched to a particular person, unlike a partial match, which can if there is enough genetic material to find the actual match.

 

[Megnut]

This article is about a cold case but it references Othram and how it does what it does and in a way that's easy to understand.

From the article:

"Othram Labs uses a process they call Forensic Grade Genome Sequencing. The process works to connect family members’ DNA to each other and can pull half a million data points from a piece of evidence."

It's obvious to me that Othram takes the same sample and looks at it in ways CODIS doesn't. CODIS is searching for a (statistical) match that is 1:1 based on key markers, 20 alleles (not 20 CELLS), whereas Othram compares an unknown sample to known profiles in order to fill out a relational tree of similar DNAs across a multitude of markers. It's not new DNA. It's more data points.

Again CODIS is a database set up for locating one individual's DNA already in the system. It is not interested in who is cousins to whom.

Othram is. The whole thrust of IGG, as I understand it, is for bringing in a new DNA string and, while comparing it against a growing database of DNA profiles and locating the family branch it belongs on. No magic. Math.

 JMO

Working 4 You: DNA testing becoming more precise, could a break in Morgan Nick’s case give answers to other families?

The family of Morgan Nick is hoping a break in their case could provide hope to others seeking answers.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Boxer]

All MOO

AT in court recently stated...

When the FBI gets involved, the profile, the test file that's a SNP to use to try to identify somebody is more than twice as big when it gets to the FBI from Othram. We don't know how. We don't have any notes. We don't know who did any of the work. We don't have any lab protocols.

Why won't the prosecution show LE and FBI's work? I'm sorry but I feel like they should have to turn it over.

All MOO

What is it you want to know?
BK is a 5.37 octillion match to the DNA on the Kabar sheath.

 

[mrjitty]

I did not think they would be able to convince me, much less a jury in this case. But when the prosecution laid it all out, especially the timeline with the bank accounts, it was very clear what happened. With the McStays, the defendant at least had some plausible excuse for his DNA being there. There's no plausible reason right now, that we've seen, for BK's DNA being on a sheath in that house.
JMO

Sure. I was simply illustrating that touch DNA is routinely used AFAIK

And much more, incomplete/mixed samples are enhanced with modelling and admitted at trial.

This seems like a very ordinary situation to me, but if not, then the defence will no doubt triumph with a motion in limine to exclude!

MOO