Quote:

---

yep, all of this. I still think he's likely guilty, but it's far from an open and shut case. curious to see what else comes out during the trial, but would be a nervy one for any prosecutor to have too much confidence

---

Hate that I have to think this much less say it out loud but the very heavy involvement of the FBI (especially the Behavioral Analysis Unit suggesting a possible serial killer) and their involvement in evidence collectton should also have those prosecutors nervous.

The reputation of the FBI ain't the greatness right now. At least the BK and the victims were all white so there isn't that racial component to the case.

I understand the families would not like this but taking the death penalty off of the table could be advisable. And why voir dire will be everything, the death penalty is too controversail and there are jurors who not vote for a conviction under any circumstances because of that.

This is such a fascinating case. The sheath piece seems to be the key to the entire thing. The rumors of the entire thing being a drug killing are interesting too.

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

This is such a fascinating case. The sheath piece seems to be the key to the entire thing. The rumors of the entire thing being a drug killing are interesting too.

---

Made more so by BK's chosen field of criminal justice with an interest in serial killers such as BTK.

aggiehawg said:

---

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

This is such a fascinating case. The sheath piece seems to be the key to the entire thing. The rumors of the entire thing being a drug killing are interesting too.

---

Made more so by BK's chosen field of criminal justice with an interest in serial killers such as BTK.

---

Absolutely! Did he think he could pull off the perfect murder for whatever sick reason or was he hired by someone due to some sort of criminal element?

There was a status hearing yesterday with the new judge in Boise.

This is a great summary by an attorney in one of the Facebook groups.

I pity da fool that gets stuck on that jury.

There's a hearing today regarding the death penalty as a potential punishment

https://www.foxnews.com/us/bryan-kohberger-fight-against-death-penalty-gets-day-court-expert-skeptical-defenses-arguments

Anti-taxxer said:

---

There's a hearing today regarding the death penalty as a potential punishment

https://www.foxnews.com/us/bryan-kohberger-fight-against-death-penalty-gets-day-court-expert-skeptical-defenses-arguments

---

Whining that it's unfair he will have to worry whether it will be lethal injection or firing squad. Yeah, like those 4 kids got a chance when he was slaughtering them.

I thought in states with multiple options gave the choice to the condemned?

Or is Idaho's lethal injection being challenged?

They should offer him a compromise between lethal injection and firing squad to the heart - we will stab you in the heart multiple times with a long syringe needle not filled with anything, until you are dead.

2-day hearing beginning this morning. Defense claims DNA evidence collected unconstitutionally.

Quote:

---

Attorneys for a man charged with murder in connection with the killings of four University of Idaho students are asking a judge to throw out most of the evidence in the case because they say it all hinges on an unconstitutional genetic investigation process.

Bryan Kohberger's defense team also contends that the search warrants in the case were tainted by police misconduct. They will make their arguments during a two-day hearing starting Thursday morning, part of which will be closed to the public. If they are successful, it could throw a major wrench in the prosecution's case before the trial starts in August.

---

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/idaho-murders-suspect-bryan-kohberger-dna-search-warrants/

This question again.

Quote:

---

Kohberger's attorneys say law enforcement violated his constitutional rights when they used a process called Investigative Genetic Genealogy, or IGG, to identify possible suspects.

"There would be no investigation into him without that original constitutional violation," attorneys Jay Weston Logsdon and Ann Taylor wrote in a court filing. They later continued, "Without IGG, there is no case, no request for his phone records, surveillance of his parents' home, no DNA taken from the garbage out front. Because the IGG analysis is the origin of this matter, everything in the affidavit should be excised."

The IGG process often starts when DNA found at the scene of a crime doesn't yield any results through standard law enforcement databases. When that happens, investigators may look at all the variations, or single nucleotide polymorphisms, that are in the DNA sample. Those SNPs, or "snips," are then uploaded to a genealogy database like GEDmatch or FamilyTreeDNA to look for possible relatives of the person whose DNA was found at the scene.

---

I'm kind of torn on this issue. On one hand, using those DNA sites is voluntary so a relative's DNA being matched would not appear to be a violation of the 4th that would be fruit of the poisonous tree, in theory at least.

As I recall the FBI was acting fairly cagey about this part of their investigation so there could be something else that I'm not seeing.

aggiehawg said:

---

This question again.

Quote:

---

Kohberger's attorneys say law enforcement violated his constitutional rights when they used a process called Investigative Genetic Genealogy, or IGG, to identify possible suspects.

"There would be no investigation into him without that original constitutional violation," attorneys Jay Weston Logsdon and Ann Taylor wrote in a court filing. They later continued, "Without IGG, there is no case, no request for his phone records, surveillance of his parents' home, no DNA taken from the garbage out front. Because the IGG analysis is the origin of this matter, everything in the affidavit should be excised."

The IGG process often starts when DNA found at the scene of a crime doesn't yield any results through standard law enforcement databases. When that happens, investigators may look at all the variations, or single nucleotide polymorphisms, that are in the DNA sample. Those SNPs, or "snips," are then uploaded to a genealogy database like GEDmatch or FamilyTreeDNA to look for possible relatives of the person whose DNA was found at the scene.

---

I'm kind of torn on this issue. On one hand, using those DNA sites is voluntary so a relative's DNA being matched would not appear to be a violation of the 4th that would be fruit of the poisonous tree, in theory at least.

As I recall the FBI was acting fairly cagey about this part of their investigation so there could be something else that I'm not seeing.

---

unless those companies agreed to keep all your information private and it's now semi-public information (like when you put your trash at the curb), can it really be excluded?

I mean that's how these companies match you to ancestors. Thru DNA testing, right. You have to agree to let them 'share it' so they can match you to relative.

Quote:

---

unless those companies agreed to keep all your information private and it's now semi-public information (like when you put your trash at the curb), can it really be excluded?

---

To me, as long as the search warrant was obtained legally, those companies turning over their records would not be reason to exclude the evidence.

Having said that, how broad was that warrant? For their entire database? IDK.

I wonder what happens to the prosecution's case if this is thrown out?

I don't remember the timeline off the top of my head. Did they ID him from the car first? Or him, then realized the car matched?

Edited to add - what evidence was collected after the familial dna, that would likely be excluded if this is thrown out?

Seems like this would all hinge on the privacy policies of the DNA database companies. If their policy did not provide an express promise of privacy, then he has no expectation of privacy if he or his relatives used it willingly.

Who needs a warrant to get the DNA profiles from the DB? Serve a subpoena. When you end your DNA to a 3rd party, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Just like issuing a subpoena to a physician or psychiatrist.

Anti-taxxer said:

---

I wonder what happens to the prosecution's case if this is thrown out?

I don't remember the timeline off the top of my head. Did they ID him from the car first? Or him, then realized the car matched?

Edited to add - what evidence was collected after the familial dna, that would likely be excluded if this is thrown out?

---

My recollection was that they had identified a color and make of a car that was of interest to them. They didn't yet the model year until later. As they searched the records for cars possibly matching the description, BK's car popped up since he had reregistered it from PA to WA shortly after the murders.

After that they subpoenaed the GPS records from the manufacturer, saw it had been in the vicinity, got his phone records as to where it was pinging in the days leading up to and including the night of the murders. From those phone records, the numbers from his family in PA. So they knew his Dad was with him driving back to PA.

There were some rumors that the car had been under some surveillance during the trip back but I never saw anything definitive on that. The PA authorities were alerted and they took over watching the house in PA for several days before obtaining the garbage can contents left on the street for pick-up and doing DNA tests on that.

But to my knowledge, the touch DNA that was on the knife sheath he left at the scene was initially the only forensic evidence that ultimately linked him to it.

As to identifying his car, DNA did not appear to be any part of that.

Yeah, I don't see his lawyer's angle standing up. This DNA is voluntarily given and intended for comparison. That said, if it does get tossed, the prosecution is hosed. That knife sheath is the key to the case. They have nothing else physical, some of the eye witness stuff is odd, and everything else is really really thin. Driving around in a white car and pinging some towers - which even that seems to be in some dispute - isn't going to get a murder conviction. They gotta have the sheath so that the driving location evidence is just support to show the sheath being there wasn't coincidental in some way, that he was at least nearby

Trucker 96 said:

---

Yeah, I don't see his lawyer's angle standing up. This DNA is voluntarily given and intended for comparison. That said, if it does get tossed, the prosecution is hosed. That knife sheath is the key to the case. They have nothing else physical, some of the eye witness stuff is odd, and everything else is really really thin. Driving around in a white car and pinging some towers - which even that seems to be in some dispute - isn't going to get a murder conviction. They gotta have the sheath so that the driving location evidence is just support to show the sheath being there wasn't coincidental in some way, that he was at least nearby

---

It was enough in the Alex Murdaugh case.

Not comparable. He wasn't some rando where the only evidence they had was him maybe driving in the area at the time. They had a litany of other circumstantial to semi-circumstantial stuff on him, along with various physical (albeit things that could have other plausible explanations). Really all they have on this guy is the sheath and maybe that he was in the general vicinity at the time. Maybe, as there seem to be questions about that too. If the only evidence they have is based in proximation, they could convict hundreds of people. Gotta have the sheath

Dumb question. Say the DNA they collected from the trash is thrown out. While he sits in his jail cell for a few days while his lawyers try to argue for his release, surely there is enough probable cause to get subpoena to collect another DNA sample?

Their angle is that they never would have checked any of it in the first place or would even know to check him now without the online genetic search, so no, if the online aspect gets tossed, I think they'll be SOL on DNA overall

But again, I don't think any of it gets tossed

Different case but explains the DNA technology at issue.

A lot of people get this completely wrong and confused.

GEDMatch is a research platform in which people voluntarily upload their samples for research. Users give permission for researchers to utilize their DNA. To use it, you upload your DNA results from the commercial sites and it is completely voluntary. So you create an account on one of the bigger commercial sites and then purposefully transport your data over to GEDMatch, with your permission, to be put in a database. It is entirely opt-in. This voluntary database is the one the police use for the genealogical research.

To my knowledge they don't go around subpoenaing the commercial sites anymore. The GEDmatch database is big enough where they can usually piece together a family tree.

Thanks for that clarification. DNA discussions often result in my eyes getting crossed, it is such dry reading.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

A lot of people get this completely wrong and confused.

GEDMatch is a research platform in which people voluntarily upload their samples for research. Users give permission for researchers to utilize their DNA. To use it, you upload your DNA results from the commercial sites and it is completely voluntary. So you create an account on one of the bigger commercial sites and then purposefully transport your data over to GEDMatch, with your permission, to be put in a database. It is entirely opt-in. This voluntary database is the one the police use for the genealogical research.

To my knowledge they don't go around subpoenaing the commercial sites anymore. The GEDmatch database is big enough where they can usually piece together a family tree.

---

Meaning you are effective snitched on by a third cousin twice removed who you have never met.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

unless those companies agreed to keep all your information private and it's now semi-public information (like when you put your trash at the curb), can it really be excluded?

---

To me, as long as the search warrant was obtained legally, those companies turning over their records would not be reason to exclude the evidence.

Having said that, how broad was that warrant? For their entire database? IDK.

---

yeah, that's the trick. It's like the geofencing stuff going on.

Oh, there was a shooting in your neighborhood Mrs Hawk and we saw that your phone was within 500-yards of the shooting b/c we told Verison/T-Mobile/etc. to turn over ALL RECORDS. We now have a search warrant for your house, also turn over all your guns b/c "red flag" laws (you post on Texags.com).

txags92 said:

---

Seems like this would all hinge on the privacy policies of the DNA database companies. If their policy did not provide an express promise of privacy, then he has no expectation of privacy if he or his relatives used it willingly.

---

But if my relative consents to a search of his home it doesn't mean I consent to a search of my separate house (or even pants pockets) b/c I was in his house at the time the police showed up. Right

agracer said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Seems like this would all hinge on the privacy policies of the DNA database companies. If their policy did not provide an express promise of privacy, then he has no expectation of privacy if he or his relatives used it willingly.

---

But if my relative consents to a search of his home it doesn't mean I consent to a search of my separate house (or even pants pockets) b/c I was in his house at the time the police showed up. Right

---

If your relative uploads a picture from your house with bricks of drugs visible on the tables to their social media, should the police be prohibited from using it as probable cause to search your house because you didn't upload it yourself?

Correct. Most of us have a gazillion third and fourth cousins.

Sometimes they have to go back to the mid 1800s doing genealogical research with death/marriage records, looking at obituaries, and go all the way back down the family tree to find people who lived in the right area at the right time, right age, etc. The Golden State killer genealogical research took a significant amount of time.

It's not as simple as upload and get a result.

That's not the scenario here. This is more akin to the police searching your cousin's house (with the permission of your cousin) and finding criminal evidence that directly links back to you.

The police then get a warrant to search you based on the applicable standard.

agracer said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Seems like this would all hinge on the privacy policies of the DNA database companies. If their policy did not provide an express promise of privacy, then he has no expectation of privacy if he or his relatives used it willingly.

---

But if my relative consents to a search of his home it doesn't mean I consent to a search of my separate house (or even pants pockets) b/c I was in his house at the time the police showed up. Right

---

Separate house, no. Pants pocket while in the premises being searched? Different issue. You have a bulge in your pocket that could be a gun? Yeah, cops can pat you down for that.

EDB covering the argument portion now.

The defense is arguing that the state needed a warrant to develop the DNA profile found at the scene in the way they did. Judge is not buying it.

They are also saying the initial laboratory did not result anything useful. They are saying the FBI took over the DNA testing and are still refusing to turn over discovery as to how they performed the tests, who did it, how the snippet grew in size there, and how that led to the Kohberger house search.