4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #90

[schooling]

From the point of view of the defense--if the standard investigative techniques led to the DNA match, there seems to be no avenue for getting that DNA thrown out. If the IGG led to the DNA match, they may think they can test the constitutionality of IGG or the methods for producing the match, and get it thrown out. So which came first is going to be very important to them.

So the match gets thrown out, then what?

Prosecutors would likely just march right back down to the courthouse and obtain a new BK sample with the evidence they have outside of IGG. And just like before, CODIS match, 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1.

Unless we're imagining some sort of nuclear option scenario. Where we throw out all of the evidence and/or detective work...pretending none of it exists. Which kills all roads to BK and a CODIS match. Essentially making him immune from prosecution. Forever. Since the argument seems to be "you found BK unfairly using IGG...." I'm guessing any and all evidence used to 'show their work' in finding him is fruit from a poison tree?

Or maybe the judge thinks LE/Prosecutors acts are so egregious that they dismiss the case with prejudice? OK now I'm just being crazy. Two scenarios I could never ever imagine happening.

So maybe BK gets a successful appeal and new trial off of a 3rd scenerio. But then we are right back to prosecutors just obtaining a new sample with the evidence they have.

There's not a plausible scenario that benefits BK.

Ultimately, Prosecutors / LE pulling that DNA locally, first, was a checkmate move. The IGG stuff is a sideshow and largely inconsequential. If anyone disagrees just answer the question "Then what....?"

 

[gliving]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1722041890088915359

 

[schooling]

I'm genuinely interested in what people imagine happening if the Judge found problems with the IGG evidence. Not even the media has played this out. If they did they'd see the giant gaping holes. Everyone is just sort of pretending that this dead end road leads somewhere.

Can someone who believes that this might happen answer these questions?

1. What will the judge do? If you don't have a single answer, then give us a few theories on the judges actions.
2. How do your theories of the judges actions impact the DNA evidence?
3. If your answer to #2 means the DNA evidence is tossed. Why wouldn't prosecutors just not be able to immediately obtain another sample?
4. If your answer to #3 is that other evidence would be impacted and prosecutors might now have probable cause...Does this make BK essentially immune from prosecution?
5. If not and we are telling LE to investigate again, how do we make LE get amnesia and forget that BK and his white Elantra exists now? So they can start all over again and do it more fairly this time?
6. If they start all over again can they rediscover the non-DNA evidence that connects him to the crime. Can they use it? Or is it fruit from a poison tree?
7. Do your answers to the above questions add up to BK being immune from prosecution? Is that justice?
8. How does any of the million scenarios not cascade into wildly implausible outcomes in this case?

#8 is why IMO I think the judge will sit on their hands and leave it up to the appeals court. They'll deny it too as IMO they'll recognize that there is no remedy. And if they toss the 'Match' does that change the outcome of the case to order a new trial? If so then prosecutors will just get a new 'match'.

 

[wendy44]

I think those are really good questions since DNA is a unique type of evidence in that you can just go get more. If it's a gun or a shirt or some blood spatter in a car and that gets thrown out, you can't just go find another gun or shirt or whatever. There's not an endless supply of these crime scene items. If they manage to get the DNA thrown out because of IGG, can they then use the other evidence to get another sample? And now he's in CODIS right? No IGG needed. Law enforcement has already obtained your DNA. I can genuinely say I have no idea what would happen.

 

[jepop]

The study you linked is from 2015. There have been major advances in the study of DNA in the last 8+ years, IMO.

The very specific and controlled conditions of that study (this study has been raised on these threads before) may and Imo probably will prove not relevant/unsupported as far as the dna evidence in this case goes- Moo. It references dna transfer to a knife handle not a snap button for starters. But picture this - the D speculating probability wise with no evidence (unless BK gets up on the stand) that BK had some sort of 15 minute continuous and direct hand contact with an unknown individual who then immediately opened the clasp of the sheath with the palm of their hand (?) and deposited BK's dna on the button. Do people open knife sheathes with their palms generally? A prosecution expert will counter that study's applicability with relevant ease if it is ever brought into evidence via an expert by the D Imo. Moo

 

[katydid23]

No it does not. Please see the study I linked above where pairs people were asked to shake hands and then one person of each pair was asked to handle a knife with the hand they shook hands with.
"In 85 percent of the cases, DNA from the person who did not directly touch the knife was transferred in sufficient quantity to produce a profile. In one-fifth of the samples, that person was identified as the main or only contributor of DNA to the potential weapon, despite never having touched it."
This is why touch DNA alone cannot be trusted in this or any other case. Touch DNA is becoming more and more controversial because too many innocent people have been convicted based on touch DNA, not just in the USA but overseas as well and I believe in the not so distant future, there will be new rules in courtrooms on touch DNA evidence which may require that touch DNA only be considered IF there is other evidence which proves the suspect was actually in the location.

But that's why it takes MORE than just the DNA. If they found his DNA on the snap, and then investigated him, they'd look for his alibi and other possible evidence.

If someone's touch DNA is at a crime scene, that is only one possible indicator. Then you need evidence to corroborate their involvement. And they have that in this case, from what it seems so far. JMO

 

[Justice101]

The defense isn't disputing the Idaho State Lab DNA results so we shouldn't be trying to dispute them on here.Very misleading.

5.37 Octillion times likely to be BK's DNA. TWENTY SEVEN ZEROS - 000000000000000000000000000

From @10ofRods:

No one is disputing the actual DNA labwork. The Prosecution did not run the DNA themselves, it was done at the Idaho State Police Lab. No one is claiming THEY did it wrong (especially as now there is a buccal swab and it matches Kohberger precisely, as it should).

There are now pages and pages of very negative hyper-focus on DNA that the defense does not even dispute.

Yeh, the only thing that scares me is they had OJs DNA and had him nailed.. .but an <modsnip> jury fixated on the bad apples in the police dept and gave OJ an innocent verdict even though everybody on the planet knew he was guilty.

So juries...can make mistakes with non-critical thinking errors... so anything is possible.

Just my opinion

 

[jepop]

Yeh, the only thing that scares me is they had OJs DNA and had him nailed.. .but an <modsnip> jury fixated on the bad apples in the police dept and gave OJ an innocent verdict even though everybody on the planet knew he was guilty.

So juries...can make mistakes with non-critical thinking errors... so anything is possible.

Just my opinion

It's been a long time since OJ and the circumstances of this case are not the same. Moo

 

[girlhasnoname]

From the point of view of the defense--if the standard investigative techniques led to the DNA match, there seems to be no avenue for getting that DNA thrown out. If the IGG led to the DNA match, they may think they can test the constitutionality of IGG or the methods for producing the match, and get it thrown out. So which came first is going to be very important to them.

I don't agree because BK left his DNA at the crime scene which was a single source Touch DNA on the snap of the sheath underneath or between a victim. They compared that with his DNA taken after arrest and it was a ginormous match. 5+ Octillion

They had probable cause to arrest BK without the IGG match IMO and stated that it should not be relied upon for the PCA if in doubt.

The State has covered the angles that the Defense can try and posture IMO, but I do give AT & CO. an A for effort. She is fighting vigorously for her client, which he is constitutionally entitled to even though I personally think he's guilty and will be found so eventually by a jury.

JMO

 

[Boxer]

Yeh, the only thing that scares me is they had OJs DNA and had him nailed.. .but an <modsnip> jury fixated on the bad apples in the police dept and gave OJ an innocent verdict even though everybody on the planet knew he was guilty.

So juries...can make mistakes with non-critical thinking errors... so anything is possible.

Just my opinion

Unfortunately there was more than a bad apple, there was a break in the chain of custody of the sample.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Unfortunately there was more than a bad apple, there was a break in the chain of custody of the sample.

Yes and so very much more IMO.

 

[Justice101]

But there is no definition of "standard" in U.S. jurisprudence. Each jurisdiction has its own precedents (unless SCOTUS has weighed in - rare).

I do think that the Defense holds out an idea that the local courts of appeal might take their side.

The problem is that logically and objectively: police, investigators and prosecutors have been allowed to use evidence with such strong correlations to reality...since forever? since we have records?

I suppose there could be a radical new interpretation of the Constitution. (I know you're not arguing that will happen - I'm just mulling over what a USA-changing thing that would be). I am sure I won't live to see this duked out - but each step along the way is deserving of attention - and questioning, if we do not wish our system to work the way it is.

IMO.

Whether from a tip... or seeing something on line.. or whatever else can help narrow down the identity of a person potentially responsible for a crime.... should be allowed.

What if the tip of the type person responsible came from a psychic? What about an FBI profile that said the person was very strong and tall? that helps narrow down the pool of suspects.

I really (hope) that this is just the defense grasping for straws to find SOMETHING, ANYTHING that could help his client create reasonable doubt.

I just don't see this level of expertise (FBI) making any kind of mistake in rushing to judgement. I think we are think he did it and are just nervous because the defense is not just laying over giving up.

 

[Justice101]

I don't agree because BK left his DNA at the crime scene which was a single source Touch DNA on the snap of the sheath underneath or between a victim. They compared that with his DNA taken after arrest and it was a ginormous match. 5+ Octillion

They had probable cause to arrest BK without the IGG match IMO and stated that it should not be relied upon for the PCA if in doubt.

The State has covered the angles that the Defense can try and posture IMO, but I do give AT & CO. an A for effort. She is fighting vigorously for her client, which he is constitutionally entitled to even though I personally think he's guilty and will be found so eventually by a jury.

JMO

Well said!

And the FBI and state police buttoned down any credible angle of attack for shoddy work, rushing to judgement, etc.

The FBI is a group of pros.... they are not totally infallible, but they follow rules and you rarely get a rogue agent making a mistake that will get exposed in court.

that's my opinion anyway

 

[Cool Cats]

Yeh, the only thing that scares me is they had OJs DNA and had him nailed.. .but an <modsnip> jury fixated on the bad apples in the police dept and gave OJ an innocent verdict even though everybody on the planet knew he was guilty.

So juries...can make mistakes with non-critical thinking errors... so anything is possible.

Just my opinion

They never had OJ's DNA at the crime scene or he would have been convicted like BK will be.

 

[10ofRods]

They never had OJ's DNA at the crime scene or he would have been convicted like BK will be.

They did have blood/DNA at the scene (analyzed by an early expert in forensic DNA). OJ cut himself and left a trail of drips alongside the footprints in the victims' blood. And there was some on the gate.

What's equally interesting is that the same expert (and another DNA expert as well) testified that Nicole and Ron's blood was found multiple places inside the Bronco, and on one of OJ's socks, found in his bedroom. And of course, the shoes were a rare type that OJ owned, etc.

But experts were brought in to criticize the State's expert on everything from number of swabs used to whether the DNA expert could reconstruct the crime scene and explain the "how." (A blood spatter analyst did that - the DNA lab workers did not have this ability strongly in their toolkit, as it's not what they do).

Whole thing (including the choice of court venue) was a fiasco. The Prosecution made many errors - jury stopped paying attention, IMO, to what was then an exceedingly technical discussion of DNA. Although in the end, the experts were just talking about OJ, Nicole and Ron's blood - and where it was.

IMO

 

[SortaSleuthy]

The defense isn't disputing the Idaho State Lab DNA results so we shouldn't be trying to dispute them on here.Very misleading.

5.37 Octillion times likely to be BK's DNA. TWENTY SEVEN ZEROS - 000000000000000000000000000

From @10ofRods:

No one is disputing the actual DNA labwork. The Prosecution did not run the DNA themselves, it was done at the Idaho State Police Lab. No one is claiming THEY did it wrong (especially as now there is a buccal swab and it matches Kohberger precisely, as it should).

There are now pages and pages of very negative hyper-focus on DNA that the defense does not even dispute.

5.37 Octillion times likely to be BK's DNA.
I can hear the defense‘s lawyer: “Sooo, there’s a chance!”

 

[Balthazar]

But that's why it takes MORE than just the DNA. If they found his DNA on the snap, and then investigated him, they'd look for his alibi and other possible evidence.

If someone's touch DNA is at a crime scene, that is only one possible indicator. Then you need evidence to corroborate their involvement. And they have that in this case, from what it seems so far. JMO

My point exactly. I hope that the prosecution does have some other evidence that places BK INSIDE that house. I hope BEFORE BK was arrested LE did a photo lineup of men wearing masks similar to what DM described the man she saw wearing and DM was able to identify BK as the person she saw that night. If she could not identify him from such a lineup, it's going to be a huge problem for the prosecution. I really hope LE has something...anything else that actually places him INSIDE that house. The touch DNA is not sufficient without some corroborating evidence.

 

[Justice101]

They never had OJ's DNA at the crime scene or he would have been convicted like BK will be.

yes they had his blood. ..but the science was not as good and it was like a 1 in 1000 chance that it wasn't OJ's DNA.

However, both Nicole and Ron?'s DNA was found in the Bronco.

Point is, there were many errors by prosecution.. .but still, they had enough evidence to convict but the jury was biased IMO

 

[katydid23]

My point exactly. I hope that the prosecution does have some other evidence that places BK INSIDE that house. I hope BEFORE BK was arrested LE did a photo lineup of men wearing masks similar to what DM described the man she saw wearing and DM was able to identify BK as the person she saw that night. If she could not identify him from such a lineup, it's going to be a huge problem for the prosecution. I really hope LE has something...anything else that actually places him INSIDE that house. The touch DNA is not sufficient without some corroborating evidence.

They need corroborating evidence, but not necessarily to put him inside the house, because the sheath DNA does that.
[and the bloody footprint might ?]

They do have his car and phone traveling together from his home to Moscow, meandering around for quite awhile and then making his way to the crime scene, doing the 3 point turn and parking. And what is really damning is the slow back road drive on the way home.

Putting his car there right as the killings begin and leaving right when the masked stranger was seen leaving is plenty of corroboration for the DNA, IMO

 

[Balthazar]

The very specific and controlled conditions of that study (this study has been raised on these threads before) may and Imo probably will prove not relevant/unsupported as far as the dna evidence in this case goes- Moo. It references dna transfer to a knife handle not a snap button for starters. But picture this - the D speculating probability wise with no evidence (unless BK gets up on the stand) that BK had some sort of 15 minute continuous and direct hand contact with an unknown individual who then immediately opened the clasp of the sheath with the palm of their hand (?) and deposited BK's dna on the button. Do people open knife sheathes with their palms generally? A prosecution expert will counter that study's applicability with relevant ease if it is ever brought into evidence via an expert by the D Imo. Moo

Usually, when you shake hands, your fingertip pads are touching the other person's hand. AND it is even possible to be scratched accidentally by the nail(s) of someone you shook hands with. So, the DNA would definitely be in the right location to be transferred to the snap of the sheath. The study proved that touch DNA can be transferred from human skin to metal effectively and even with a result of a single contributor, not mixed, in some cases. I believe the snap would be made of metal in this case, not plastic, so, yes, this study would apply.