From the article: 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.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14389121/Bryan-Kohberger-DNA-murder-trial.html

Anti-taxxer said:

---

From the article: 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.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14389121/Bryan-Kohberger-DNA-murder-trial.html

---

Both samples were heavily degraded, which would indicate they were there long before the murders. Both in common areas and not fresh blood.

I'd heard about the handrail, but must've missed the glove

the longer this thing strings out, the more I think he'll get off

and the longer it strings out, the more I forget about the case and the more I start to think maybe it wasn't as open and closed as I wanted it to be

If he gets off, but it is plainly obvious he did it, then I expect someone from the victims family to go off Peppermint style.

zgolfz85 said:

---

I'd heard about the handrail, but must've missed the glove

the longer this thing strings out, the more I think he'll get off

and the longer it strings out, the more I forget about the case and the more I start to think maybe it wasn't as open and closed as I wanted it to be

---

No reason to think he's going to get off. They have him dead to nuts. It's not fresh in our minds but will be in the jury's

Capital murder cases, especially where the death penalty is a real probability, always move at a glacial pace.

OJ says hi from hell.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/021925-Order-Defedants-Moton-Franks-Hearing.pdf

Franks hearing denied.

Kind of an interesting sidenote, the surviving roommate, DM, said to police that he was carrying an object that looked like a vacuum cleaner when he was leaving the murder scene.

Yeah, a K-Bar knife looks like a vacuum cleaner when your drunk or stoned.

All murders are awful, but there's something about this one that just is so horribly upsetting. I know that's a silly thing to say, but it's just so damn sad.

Not silly at all. Very sad when you see the last picture they took with the smiling faces.

Justice will be served death by firing squad.

What happens if he decides to plea guilty for life. Do they release evidence they have?

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

What happens if he decides to plea guilty for life. Do they release evidence they have?

---

I don't think the state offers him a plea deal. I think the families are vocal about wanting justice (and wanting it sped up, which isn't really feasible.)

Some Redditor pulled together key pull quotes from the denial.

A compilation of some of the key points noted by Judge Hippler in denying Franks motion and rejecting motions to suppress evidence from 17 search warrants:
On defense arguing police officers cannot use collective information from investigation in warrant affidavits:

• "A hyper technical argument"
• "it is readily apparent and obvious to magistrate that affiant officers did not do all work mentioned themselves"
• "defendant did not cite a single supporting case indicating law enforcement use of a working probable cause affidavit was improper"
• "under no circumstances could it be reasonably concluded the magistrate would not find probably cause" (if work done by each officer was individually identified)

Defense argument it was not clear who did the analysis / phone location work and found the sheath:

• "it was made abundantly clear to the magistrate that officers were relying on work done by more specialised LE agents"
• "not a shred of evidence statements were intentionally or recklessly false"

Defense asserting DM eyewitness description was unreliable:

• "challenge might be fodder for cross-examination, it is not proper subject for Franks motion"
• "Defense's own proffer establishes that DM's description was remarkably consistent throughout multiple interviews with police "
• "probable cause affidavits are very consistent with her (DM's) accounts (of intruder)"
• "More importantly, not only were DM's statements consistent with regard to the intruders description, they were accurately included by LE in exhibits/ affidavits "
• "DM was able to consistently articulate what she remembered throughout each interview - especially as to the facts relied upon in warrants"

On the car identification and specifically year ranges 2011-13 vs 2011-2016:

• email chains defense claim showed FBI "more comfortable" with 2011-13 "do not support the defense's claim and in fact state that on November 26th Agent Imel instructed the FBI to "open up" their search to 2011-2016"

• "Defense proffer does not show that FBI identification is based on the Ridge Road video"
• "there is no evidence the FBI relied on incorrect footage"

Defense claim that investigation timeline is misleading by mention of WSU police car tip:

• "there can be no question that the Defendant was identified in part by WSU officer's queries and the suspect's vehicle lack of a front license plate"
• "In neither example (WSU tip and lack of front plate) has Defendant established Detective Payne's investigation timeline to be misleading or false, much less intentionally or recklessly so"

Defense claim that someone brought the dog back into the house after suspect car left:

• "Defendant's argument assumes, without proof, there were no doors left open in the home after the suspect left. This assumption is not only speculative, but contrary to evidence in his proffer"

Defense claim that phone stopping reporting to network at 2.54am vs 2.47am is exculpatory/ misleading:

• "Defendant has not shown Detective Payne's mistake in identifying the "handoff data" to be exculpatory"
• "(defense expert) claims it was exculpatory because correct interpretation of the data would show the device "was NOT heading to Moscow as purported by Payne but was indeed heading southbound from Pullman, Washington." There are two problems with this assertion. First, the Pen Register Affidavit represents that the device was traveling south at 2:47 a.m. Second.... correction would have no effect on probable cause. Traveling southbound from Pullman at 2:54 a.m. more than an hour prior to the homicides-does not disprove that Defendant could have driven to Moscow after 2:54 a.m., after his phone stopped reporting to the network"

Defense claim that latent footprint is closer to DM's bedroom door than she said the suspect walked:

• "There is nothing false or misleading about Detective Payne's statement. The shoe print was consistent with D.M.'s account. She told law enforcement she saw Defendant walk past her bedroom door after she opened it for third time"
• (On claim it was not pointed toward sliding door) "The shoe print was reasonably within the suspect's path of travel as described by D.M."

On Denial of IGG motions from defense:

The defence challenge to IGG was rejected based on points of law and constitution that have been set out on this sub before by our resident lawyers:
[ol]

Kohberger had no expectation of privacy for DNA abandoned at a crime scene, so no 4th amendment violations.

After disavowing any connection to the knife sheath and denying it is his DNA (judge notes that disavowing knowledge of an item is the same as abandonment), Kohberger cannot then claim any privacy rights for items he denies are his, including challenging use in IGG

Use by LE of DNA collected from the sheath within the crime scene to identify a suspect was reasonable, irrespective of claimed privacy rights for abandoned DNA if it was left knowingly or unknowingly - similar to use of fingerprints from a crime scene. No medical, physical, genetic predisposition or similar "phenotypic" information was developed from the SNP profile.

Use by LE of trash collected by the trash company was not a privacy violation; Idaho Supreme court recently upheld this and the defence themselves acknowledge that precedents uphold this (but argued it is "time to rethink" the precedents)

Kohberger has no ground to challenge use of sheath DNA in IGG databases as he abandoned it, denies it is his (and disavows knowledge of the sheath) and cannot control what his distant relatives do with their own DNA in uploading to genealogy services.

FBI policy about use of genealogy databases is not a question of legality, is only guidance and the policy itself does not restrict this investigative use of crime scene DNA; use of sites that don't allow LE searches is a question of terms of service not a relevant legal/ constitutional issue:

[/ol]

Some new points of interest about the IGG process itself revealed in the ruling:

• Othram started IGG from November 22nd and the FBI took over the work on December 10th 2022
• Othram used only genealogy databases that permit LE usage (Family Tree DNA and GEDMatchPro)
• Othram identified 4 brothers of interest who were all low % matches; they did not share Kohberger's family name. (I am guessing 2nd, 3rd cousins probably at 2 or further removed who would have lower than 3% familial DNA match; they could be very "distant" from Kohberger on any family tree). ISP contacted one of these brothers who declined to give a DNA sample.
• It is likely these brothers are very "distant" on the family tree because even with outsourced expertise and then with resources of the FBI it took c 1 month from start of IGG and c 10 days after FBI took over to map any family tree to Kohberger. Family tree construction and mapping uses records such as birth/ death/ marriage records, tax, financial, criminal records etc as well as the "hits" in a genealogy database
• It is likely given the FBI took over the work from Othram after these 4 brothers were noted that they had no or a very peripheral place in the actual family tree used to pinpoint Kohberger as the suspect; logical and more likely that the starting partial familial hit that led back to Kohberger came from the later IGG work by the FBI including MyHeritage/ GedMatch - but if not, it would render the argument about FBI use of genealogy sites that don't allow LE searching totally irrelevant.
• The FBI uploaded the SNP profile to GEDMatch and MyHeritage whose terms of use don't allow LE searches; the FBI utilised a "larger SNP profile" - not clear if this is a 2nd SNP profile utilising more loci or a different format of the SNP profile uploaded as text to different genealogy sites than those used by Othram.
• Kohberger's DNA was identified in the trash lifted from the PA home, in a mixture of male and female DNA, as well as his father's DNA. Only his father's match as father of sheath DNA donor was used in the PCA. Notable it is the defense expert the judge quotes as having confirmed the PA trash male DNA from the mixture matched the sheath DNA.

The FBI violating the terms of services of a genealogical database feels like a pretty significant 4th amendment issue to me. He certainly seems guilty and don't want him to be acquitted but very annoyed at the police for it.

themissinglink said:

---

The FBI violating the terms of services of a genealogical database feels like a pretty significant 4th amendment issue to me. He certainly seems guilty and don't want him to be acquitted but very annoyed at the police for it.

---

It is a TOS not a law. I don't think you can realistically have an expectation of privacy of your genetic information when you upload it to a database that can be searched by the public at large.

Also, since Kohberger's actual DNA was not in that database, he doesn't have standing to challenge it, because his rights weren't infringed on.

Probably something we will see in future litigation, though.

Quote:

---

It is a TOS not a law. I don't think you can realistically have an expectation of privacy of your genetic information when you upload it to a database that can be searched by the public at large.

Also, since Kohberger's actual DNA was not in that database, he doesn't have standing to challenge it, because his rights weren't infringed on.

---

Excellent point. He was not directly harmed by a violation of terms of service because he was not a party to that. Not in privity.

annie88 said:

---

All murders are awful, but there's something about this one that just is so horribly upsetting. I know that's a silly thing to say, but it's just so damn sad.

---

They were pretty co-eds with their whole lives ahead them, the kind every guy wanted to date and marry in college or would be proud to have as a daughter later in life.