4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #84

[Maat99]

Genetic genealogy used to link suspect in Idaho slayings to crime scene, prosecutors say

DNA found on a knife sheath was at least 5.37 octillion times more likely to be Kohberger’s than that of an unrelated member of the public, prosecutors said in a court filing last week.

www.nbcnews.com

"Investigators first submitted DNA from the knife sheath — found facedown on a bed next to the bodies of Mogen and Goncalves, and partially under Mogen's body and the comforter — to the FBI database CODIS, which tracks DNA profiles of people who have been arrested or convicted, according to the filing. When that didn't turn up a match, investigators turned to genetic genealogy, commissioning a private lab to build a DNA profile that could be used to search for relatives, the filing states.

The FBI then took over and uploaded the DNA profile "to one or more publicly available genetic genealogy services to identify possible family members of the suspect based on shared genetic data," the filing states."

(emphasis added)

I haven’t seen any credible legal source stating that the DNA evidence on the sheath will get thrown out.
I have only seen this posted on message boards over and over.
Do you have a link to any legal analysis that suggests this is a likely outcome? If so I would love to read it because I feel like I am missing something every time this comes up.

 

[Counttrarian]

The sample submitted to CODIS was pulled first. Ultimately that's the sample that matched BK's cheek swab.

The other genealogical sample was pulled after and used as an investigative lead.

Fruit from a poison tree doesn't apply here.

Also, whenever I see this point argued there's typically no remedy given by the person presenting the argument. As the only remedy would be to throw out every piece of evidence forever and have BK be immune from prosecution.

MOO

The article clearly states it didn't match CODIS. The FBI then paid a private company to build a genetic profile (whatever that really means). Once that was created they then were able to match vs. genealogy data which again the defense is going to want to know specifics of.
And THEN the FBI tipped local LE to looks at Bryan K. as a suspect.
Thus, the method and sequence of events becomes very important.

 

[kittythehare]

Genetic genealogy used to link suspect in Idaho slayings to crime scene, prosecutors say

DNA found on a knife sheath was at least 5.37 octillion times more likely to be Kohberger’s than that of an unrelated member of the public, prosecutors said in a court filing last week.

www.nbcnews.com

"Investigators first submitted DNA from the knife sheath — found facedown on a bed next to the bodies of Mogen and Goncalves, and partially under Mogen's body and the comforter — to the FBI database CODIS, which tracks DNA profiles of people who have been arrested or convicted, according to the filing. When that didn't turn up a match, investigators turned to genetic genealogy, commissioning a private lab to build a DNA profile that could be used to search for relatives, the filing states.

The FBI then took over and uploaded the DNA profile "to one or more publicly available genetic genealogy services to identify possible family members of the suspect based on shared genetic data," the filing states."

(emphasis added)

why is that a problem, bearing in mind they had the single source dNA from the button snap?

 

[Nila Aella]

The article clearly states it didn't match CODIS. The FBI then paid a private company to build a genetic profile (whatever that really means). Once that was created they then were able to match vs. genealogy data which again the defense is going to want to know specifics of.
And THEN the FBI tipped local LE to looks at Bryan K. as a suspect.
Thus, the method and sequence of events becomes very important.

BBM: 100%

Just wanted to add that the protective order sought was also for the raw data and the initial developement of the SNP profile at a lab before it reached the fbi.



The prosecution has stated that they will not use this at trial but IMO the defense is entitled to this information through discovery. MOO

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/061623%20States%20Motion%20for%20Protective%20Order.pdf

 

[Counttrarian]

I haven’t seen any credible legal source stating that the DNA evidence on the sheath will get thrown out.
I have only seen this posted on message boards over and over.
Do you have a link to any legal analysis that suggests this is a likely outcome? If so I would love to read it because I feel like I am missing something every time this comes up.

That's very fair. The issue is that the use of DNA profiles and genealogy data is still murky and unsettled law in many jurisdictions.
So, it's likely the defense is going to want to know the exact specifics of what the FBI did and had done. There are 4th Amendment issues that will be raised.

 

[Chloegirl]

The article clearly states it didn't match CODIS. The FBI then paid a private company to build a genetic profile (whatever that really means). Once that was created they then were able to match vs. genealogy data which again the defense is going to want to know specifics of.
And THEN the FBI tipped local LE to looks at Bryan K. as a suspect.
Thus, the method and sequence of events becomes very important.

That's helpful to absorb the implications here. I would like to see a DNA expert explain it but that helps. I do wonder if you have 10 of those experts if they would all agree. Any DNA expert sources to offer?

 

[kittythehare]

The article clearly states it didn't match CODIS. The FBI then paid a private company to build a genetic profile (whatever that really means). Once that was created they then were able to match vs. genealogy data which again the defense is going to want to know specifics of.
And THEN the FBI tipped local LE to looks at Bryan K. as a suspect.
Thus, the method and sequence of events becomes very important.

Well if you don't know what building a genetic profile means, what makes you so sure the prosecution has erred?
we do have a genetics expert on this board.
@10ofRods would you care to weigh in here, if you have the time, please?

 

[Maat99]

The article clearly states it didn't match CODIS. The FBI then paid a private company to build a genetic profile (whatever that really means). Once that was created they then were able to match vs. genealogy data which again the defense is going to want to know specifics of.
And THEN the FBI tipped local LE to looks at Bryan K. as a suspect.
Thus, the method and sequence of events becomes very important.

I apologize in advance because clearly I am not following this train of thought. Are you suggesting that LE should not have moved BK to the top of the suspect list when they found his dna at the murder site? Or they shouldn’t have tested the dna against anyone other than known criminals in codis?

 

[schooling]

The article clearly states it didn't match CODIS. The FBI then paid a private company to build a genetic profile (whatever that really means). Once that was created they then were able to match vs. genealogy data which again the defense is going to want to know specifics of.
And THEN the FBI tipped local LE to looks at Bryan K. as a suspect.
Thus, the method and sequence of events becomes very important.

LE definitely has a CODIS match now.

So what's the proposed remediation? LE start over and completely exclude BK until they can find another way to connect him to the crime?

Edit: it's worth noting that no legal relief remedy has ever been proposed as an answer to this question. which is why it's such a complex issue and has yet to meaningfully lose in court (with the exception of a single NY case).

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1673457740424028160

Maybe no link as long as we don't count when he murdered them.

 

[Sundog]

I wonder if the father of BK would be allowed to testify as a witness for BK at the sentencing trial, if we get that far. I am sure that AT will put witnesses on the stand at the sentencing hearing who will present mitigating factors in relation to BK. And according to Idaho law regarding death penalty cases, the sentencing jury is allowed to hear the evidence and have compassion or sympathy for the defendant and the jury member can weigh this in relation to the imposition of the death penalty.

Below is the actual language. (Note: After reading this, I don't think a jury will impose the death penalty in this case, I think BK will be sentenced by the jury to life without parole. It only takes one juror. And I think AT is confident that this will be the case. So her focus now is elsewhere, it's about the trial and the charges, not about the sentencing. So presenting mitigation circumstances at this juncture to the prosecution is understandable. All JMO.)


Death Penalty Sentencing Instructions (ICJI 1700)

"Before the death penalty can be considered, the state must prove at least one statutorily-defined aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt. If you unanimously decide that the state has so proven (one or more) statutory aggravating cirumstance(s), then you must decide whether the imposition of the death penalty would be unjust by weighing all mitigating circumstances against each statutory aggravating circumstance that has been proven."

"A mitigating factor is any fact or circumstance relating to the crime or to the defendant's state of mind or condition at the time of the crime, or to his character, background or record, that tends to suggest that a sentence other than death should be imposed. A mitigating factor does not have to constitute a defense or excuse or justification for the crime, nor does it even have to reduce the degree of the defendant's blame for the crime. In that regard, my instructions given at the end of the trial that you were not to allow sympathy for the defendant to enter your deliberations do not apply at this sentencing proceeding. Mitigating factors may include any fact or circumstance that inspires sympathy, compassion or mercy for the defendant. Evidence supporting the existence of a mitigating factor may come from the trial or this sentencing hearing, whether produced by the defendant or the state.

 

[Counttrarian]

That's helpful to absorb the implications here. I would like to see a DNA expert explain it but that helps. I do wonder if you have 10 of those experts if they would all agree. Any DNA expert sources to offer?

Found this just now via search, not sure if it was posted before:

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/northwest/idaho/article276699036.html

 

[arielilane]

Please be advised that tomorrow is a big day in the #Idaho4 case.

The items attached will be addressed by Judge Judge.

Addressing each one in a separate tweet.

Motion to Compel:

Big Item- The defense wants the prosecution to provide Discovery pertaining to DNA tests concerning the genetic genealogy that was performed as well as information related to the scientists that performed them. There are arguments on both sides. Judge Judge will have to sort through the law and precedent regarding what the Pros must provide. There are other items requested as well.

Timelines could be set if the judge agrees to compel the Pros. They may not. Judge Judge could agree with the Pros that under the law, this information, as well as other information sought has either been provided or is not discoverable. We shall see.

Remember, it is mathematically Impossible that the DNA on the Sheath found under #Maddie's body is not #BryanKohberger's. This puts the Defense in a spin. They acquired BK's DNA legally and the Sheath legally, and there were multiple roads that led to BK being a suspect, most noted, his Elantra caught on camera speeding away from the murder scene.

Eye on the Facts!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1673342805178032129

Tomorrow's Hearing:

Motion by #Bryankohberger's team to make available all records pertaining to the Grand Jury proceedings regarding the indictment of BK.

The answer to this request seems clear. They should be able to hear the proceedings or get the transcript. I attached the Rule the defense quotes below for reference.

The Defense is asking for the entirety of information pertaining to the Grand Jury. This is well outside of what they are entitled to under this law, but what is the case law addressing this issue? I expect Judge Judge to stay within precedents set, but we shall see. I have every faith in Judge Judge.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1673355588951244801

Item number 4 on the list tomorrow:

Motion to Stay proceedings.

The defense is pushing hard here. They filed their Motion, then prepared an affidavit and asked for in person Hearing to address with the judge.

The issue is, they are asking for a stay based on information they don't have. It's out of order from a bird's eye view, but perhaps the affidavit and their words during the hearing will move Judge Judge.

We shall see.

Please see both Motion to stay and Prosecution answer in previous cart and horse tweets

I thought all weekend about the DNA spin and read many of the BK fan club tweets. I also watched my friends, parents of GA who was viciously attacked, hit and kicked at gunpoint, after a heathen broke into her house in the early morning hours and attacked her.

I see the #Idaho parent's pain and memory of their children being pounced on here on Twitter.
#Bryankohberger's high dollar and high powered team of lawyers and experts are on hand to protect his rights and see he receives a fair trial and Judge Judge will also make sure the law is followed impartially.

For me: Eyes on the Facts and on the importance of the VICTIMS and what they suffered at the hands of a monster being remembered and not lost through all the nonsense of the key board warriors.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1673364216399695878

https://twitter.com/CoffindafferFBI

 

[schooling]

It's worth noting that civil liberty groups all around the country are currently pouring money into legal challenges against genealogical dna connected/obtained leads.

With the amount of evidence against BK and the pure violence committed in this crime....this is not going to be the case that changes public perception or the law. If the defense is banking on that then they mind as well start negotiating a plea deal to avoid death.

MOO

 

[kittythehare]

I wonder if the father of BK would be allowed to testify as a witness for BK at the sentencing trial, if we get that far. I am sure that AT will put witnesses on the stand at the sentencing hearing who will present mitigating factors in relation to BK. And according to Idaho law regarding death penalty cases, the sentencing jury is allowed to hear the evidence and have compassion or sympathy for the defendant and the jury member can weigh this in relation to the imposition of the death penalty.

Below is the actual language. (Note: After reading this, I don't think a jury will impose the death penalty in this case, I think BK will be sentenced by the jury to life without parole. It only takes one juror. And I think AT is confident that this will be the case. So her focus now is elsewhere, it's about the trial and the charges, not about the sentencing. So presenting mitigation circumstances at this juncture to the prosecution is understandable. All JMO.)


Death Penalty Sentencing Instructions (ICJI 1700)

"Before the death penalty can be considered, the state must prove at least one statutorily-defined aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt. If you unanimously decide that the state has so proven (one or more) statutory aggravating cirumstance(s), then you must decide whether the imposition of the death penalty would be unjust by weighing all mitigating circumstances against each statutory aggravating circumstance that has been proven."

"A mitigating factor is any fact or circumstance relating to the crime or to the defendant's state of mind or condition at the time of the crime, or to his character, background or record, that tends to suggest that a sentence other than death should be imposed. A mitigating factor does not have to constitute a defense or excuse or justification for the crime, nor does it even have to reduce the degree of the defendant's blame for the crime. In that regard, my instructions given at the end of the trial that you were not to allow sympathy for the defendant to enter your deliberations do not apply at this sentencing proceeding. Mitigating factors may include any fact or circumstance that inspires sympathy, compassion or mercy for the defendant. Evidence supporting the existence of a mitigating factor may come from the trial or this sentencing hearing, whether produced by the defendant or the state.

That is why I would never be accepted on a DP jury.
I've had to pull myself back several times in this case because my natural inclination is to feel compassion for him.

I feel no such compassion for his defense team, however.
Play silly games, win silly prizes.
Prosecution told them so today. Now get on with it.

 

[kittythehare]

BBM: 100%

Just wanted to add that the protective order sought was also for the raw data and the initial developement of the SNP profile at a lab before it reached the fbi.

View attachment 431274

The prosecution has stated that they will not use this at trial but IMO the defense is entitled to this information through discovery. MOO

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/061623%20States%20Motion%20for%20Protective%20Order.pdf

It's not complicated and this is a very simple article.
@10ofRods will explain it much better.

How DNA Profiling Works

If you were thrown into prison for a crime you didn't commit, you'd probably welcome DNA profiling. Although the use of this technology has recently helped bring justice, there may be cause for concern.

science.howstuffworks.com

 

[Sundog]

Here is the the form that the sentencing jury will have to return to the judge if they determine that one or more of the charges of aggravating circumstances has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If they don't determine that one or more of the charges of aggravating circumstnace have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then they don't need to move on to the next section. But if they do determine that at least one is valid, then they must make one of the following determinations.

For each of the aggravating circumstances charges that the sentencing jury has determined have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, they have to indicate the following on a form:

"With respect to the statutory aggravating circumstance that (insert circumstance), we find that:

- when weighed against this aggravating circumstance, all mitigating circumstances are sufficiently compelling that the death penalty would be unjust.

OR

- when weighed against this aggravating circumstance, all mitigating circumstances are not sufficiently compelling to make imposition of the death penalty unjust.

OR

- we are unable to unanimously decide whether or not all mitigating circumstances are sufficiently compelling that the death penalty would be unjust.

 

[Sundog]

So the DP can only be on the table at sentencing if the prosecution seeks the DP to begin with?

Yes.

 

[kittythehare]

Here is the the form that the sentencing jury will have to return to the judge if they determine that one or more of the charges of aggravating circumstances has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If they don't determine that one or more of the charges of aggravating circumstnace have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then they don't need to move on to the next section. But if they do determine that at least one is valid, then they must make one of the following determinations.

For each of the aggravating circumstances charges that the sentencing jury has determined have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, they have to indicate the following on a form:

"With respect to the statutory aggravating circumstance that (insert circumstance), we find that:

- when weighed against this aggravating circumstance, all mitigating circumstances are sufficiently compelling that the death penalty would be unjust.

OR

- when weighed against this aggravating circumstance, all mitigating circumstances are not sufficiently compelling to make imposition of the death penalty unjust.

OR

- we are unable to unanimously decide whether or not all mitigating circumstances are sufficiently compelling that the death penalty would be unjust.

Even if they agree on DP, it will be followe by 10 years of expensive appeals.
He'll have plenty of time to cause further harm in that period to fellow inmates.

 

[wary]

That's helpful to absorb the implications here. I would like to see a DNA expert explain it but that helps. I do wonder if you have 10 of those experts if they would all agree. Any DNA expert sources to offer?

I’m no DNA expert, but I’ve been following closely the amazing, almost miraculous work in the field of genetic genealogy.

First of all, here’s what the ‘genetic profile, (whatever that means,)’ means.

When they sent the DNA results through CODIS, they did a spot-check of a relatively small number of DNA sequences. I think you can visualize it as the equivalent of: ‘identify a book by checking what’s on page 37, page 75, page 116, etc.’ That works, if they have a good sample, and if the person they’re looking for is in CODIS.

When they move to using forensic genetic genealogy, they analyze much more completely—they try to get ‘the entire book,’ so to speak. That’s the genetic profile that’s being mentioned.

Then they enter this profile in DNA databases that allow for this. GEDmatch is the first one that comes to mind. People have entered their own genetic profiles, and agreed that LE can use it.

So, you look at this information, voluntarily offered by innocent people, hoping to find people who seem to be related to the person you’re looking for. You try to set up a family tree—you may have found someone who has the same great-grandparents as your suspect. You look at the people on the branches of that tree, ruling some out: too old, too young, dead, in prison, never been near Idaho.

And here’s someone who’s 10 miles away from the scene of the murder, who drives the same sort of car that was caught on camera near the scene of the murder, etc. etc. A judge agrees that LE has probable cause for arrest, even if they didn’t have that DNA.

They arrest him, take his DNA, and it is a statistical certain match to the original DNA on the sheath. At this point, the family tree, with all its innocent people, is completely irrrlevant, in my opinion.

MOO