Murders of 4 Idaho College Students - suspect arrested

dudalb said:
I am not crazy about the inquisitorial system because you have the problem of the biases of the people doing the inquisition.
The inquistional system looks fine on paper, but, as with many schemes on paper, human beings mess it up.
The Adversarial systems has problems, but IMHO works better then the inquistorial system.
Click to expand...
As opposed to the biases of the investigators in the adversarial system?
 
Stacyhs said:
The weaknesses in the inquisitorial system are why Italy moved to the adversarial system.
Click to expand...

These aren't totally mutually exclusive. It's possible to borrow parts of one for use in the other. Similar to a capitalism/socialism mix most western counties have.

Part of the insanity in the US system is how much of it has evolved to force people to plea bargain to avoid trials. We have less of an adversarial system and more of a sales system.

In high profile cases such as this when the defense has resources at least on par with the state the adversarial system can be at least fair. In the vast majority of cases this isn't so.
 
dudalb said:
My Attroney Kid Sister said that Lawyer who only defended innocent clients would starve to death very quickly.
Click to expand...

If defense attorneys were tasked with deciding guilt and innocence when taking clients we'd have a functionally inquisitorial system. Just one run by attorneys.
'
A lot of the problem with the US system isn't that it is adversarial in the abstract. It's the maladaptive systems we have because giving everyone a full and Constitutionally fair trial in every jailable case would be extremely inefficient to the point where enforcing law would be impossible.
 
catsmate said:
As opposed to the biases of the investigators in the adversarial system?
Click to expand...

It can be argued that in real world terms the US has an inquisitorial system in that prosecutorial discretion is where cases are decided. The prosecutor decides what to charge and because sentences are so high it usually becomes a negotiation over sentence because trials are expensive and max sentences so high.

Especially in the Federal system. Not quite as much as back when the sentencing guidelines were mandatory but what the AUSA decides to charge pretty much decides most cases because going to trial is often insane.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
In the lab, like the way they framed OJ. :rolleyes:

I suspect they'll argue it was trace DNA. Juries get confused. But this guy is no OJ and the jurors in the pool are going to be vicious.
Click to expand...

I agree.

The defense is already claiming the genealogy testing which was used to connect the DNA to Kohberger's father, and thus him, was flawed but I don't see how that's really pertinent since they then tested DNA taken directly from Kohberger's cheek. It matched the DNA on the sheath and was "5.37 octillion times more likely to be Kohberger's than a random person from the general population, according to the documents."

Kohberger's DNA was also the only DNA found on the sheath . In the study linked here, where there is secondary DNA transfer of person A by person B, person B always left their own DNA in addition to person A's DNA. So there is little chance that Kohberger's DNA was due to secondary transfer.

The prosecution will have to counter any claims of in-lab contamination by showing that no other DNA of Kohberger had been processed there before the knife sheath's sample and that all anti-contamination protocols had been followed.
 
The defense might be trying to get Kohberger's DNA excluded by claiming the warrant for it was illegally obtained.

Just a thought.
 
Kohberger's trial has been set for Oct. 2. His defense has been ordered to provide any witnesses to their claim that Kohberger has a habit of taking long drives in the middle of the night by Sept. 8.
 
Stacyhs said:
.... His defense has been ordered to provide any witnesses to their claim that Kohberger has a habit of taking long drives in the middle of the night by Sept. 8.
Click to expand...

It might be interesting if this is the case and it turns out there are other murders or even house break-ins that coincide.
 
Stacyhs said:
I agree.

The defense is already claiming the genealogy testing which was used to connect the DNA to Kohberger's father, and thus him, was flawed but I don't see how that's really pertinent since they then tested DNA taken directly from Kohberger's cheek. It matched the DNA on the sheath and was "5.37 octillion times more likely to be Kohberger's than a random person from the general population, according to the documents."

Kohberger's DNA was also the only DNA found on the sheath . In the study linked here, where there is secondary DNA transfer of person A by person B, person B always left their own DNA in addition to person A's DNA. So there is little chance that Kohberger's DNA was due to secondary transfer.

The prosecution will have to counter any claims of in-lab contamination by showing that no other DNA of Kohberger had been processed there before the knife sheath's sample and that all anti-contamination protocols had been followed.
Click to expand...

Since the sheath was found “partially under Madison’s body and the comforter on the bed”, if it is true that the only DNA on the knife was from Kohberger this is problematic. We are expected to believe that a sheath laying under the body of someone stabbed to death is not contaminated by any of the victim's DNA, but a trace amount of DNA from the accused was present.
 
Skeptical Greg said:
Idaho slayings: Bryan Kohberger's attorneys ask judge to dismiss indictment




Too bad attorneys don't get billed by the hour for wasting the courts time and resources..
Click to expand...

This assessment requires perfect knowledge that the prosecution has followed due process strictly, has made no errors, and is not trying to railroad the defendant.

The whole point of the right to an attorney is for the defendant to have an advocate who will make sure that's actually the case. Why would you want to undermine this institution with such nonsense?
 
catsmate said:
As opposed to the biases of the investigators in the adversarial system?
Click to expand...

The biases of the investigators in the adversarial system are counter-balanced by their adversary, who has standing to see all their evidence, challenge all their motions, cross-examine all their witnesses, and rebut all their arguments.

The adversarial system doesn't get rid of biases - that's impossible. Rather, it pits the biases of one motivated arguer against another. That seems to me like the most optimal solution. I don't know if the inquisitorial system has similar safeguards.
 
Planigale said:
Since the sheath was found “partially under Madison’s body and the comforter on the bed”, if it is true that the only DNA on the knife was from Kohberger this is problematic. We are expected to believe that a sheath laying under the body of someone stabbed to death is not contaminated by any of the victim's DNA, but a trace amount of DNA from the accused was present.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It doesn't say the sheath was touching Madison's body itself. If Madison was wearing pajamas or a sheet was between them, that could account for only his DNA being on it. Her body itself could have protected the sheath from coming in contact with the blood or the blood was not in that particular location. You can bet there are photos of exactly how it was found.
 
Last edited:
Planigale said:
Since the sheath was found “partially under Madison’s body and the comforter on the bed”, if it is true that the only DNA on the knife was from Kohberger this is problematic. We are expected to believe that a sheath laying under the body of someone stabbed to death is not contaminated by any of the victim's DNA, but a trace amount of DNA from the accused was present.
Click to expand...

The DNA was found on the inside of the steel snap, which helped protect it. Since no sketches, photographs, or video of the crime scene are available there's no point in speculating, or debating the stated evidence in the PCA at this moment.
 
Planigale said:
Since the sheath was found “partially under Madison’s body and the comforter on the bed”, if it is true that the only DNA on the knife was from Kohberger this is problematic. We are expected to believe that a sheath laying under the body of someone stabbed to death is not contaminated by any of the victim's DNA, but a trace amount of DNA from the accused was present.
Click to expand...

Do we know there was no DNA found on the ' knife ' ?

This is about the sheath.
 
I knew a technical recruiter named Courtney Marshall. He went by Cort. I don't think he ever figured out why everyone snickered when he introduced himself.
 
JayUtah said:
I knew a technical recruiter named Courtney Marshall. He went by Cort. I don't think he ever figured out why everyone snickered when he introduced himself.
Click to expand...

In Sweden, Germany and a few other countries, children's names must be approved by the government. I can understand why. There was a hilarious skit years ago on SNL that had a mother suing a drug company for stealing her children's names for their products:

 
Judges upholds murder indictment:
An Idaho judge on Thursday declined to dismiss a grand jury indictment against a man accused of fatally stabbing four University of Idaho students.

Bryan Kohberger is charged with four counts of murder and one count of burglary in connection with the deaths at a rental house near the school’s campus in Moscow, Idaho, last November.

Kohberger’s attorneys filed a motion earlier this year asking the judge to dismiss the indictment, contending in part that the jury was biased, that jurors were given inadmissible evidence, and that they didn’t use the right legal standard when they decided to indict.
Click to expand...
 
It has come to my attention that a self-proclaimed psychic has been making TikTok videos based on tarot card readings claiming that a professor at this college masterminded the murders. She has been sued for defamation.

 
Stacyhs said:
So the armchair detective nutcases are already out including this one:
Click to expand...

Axxman300 said:
I hope the professor puts her in the poor-house.
Click to expand...

Craig4 said:
I guess Guillard failed to notice what happened in the Alex Jones cases. Kind of a big miss.
Click to expand...

Who could have imagined that making money by publicly accusing innocent people of involvement in horrible crimes could have any consequences?

Seems like her spirit guides failed to warn her she was going to lose utterly. It does make me cringe that she insisted on representing herself without appearing to have the slightest idea of what the court required of her, even just to avoid losing by default.

Armchair detectives, eh?
 
Armchair detectives and armchair psychologists abound on internet forums. Mostly, they reveal their ignorance regarding whatever topic they're discussing.
 
Blue Mountain said:
Raw link; didn't click.

This is a discussion board. Please discuss instead of drive-by posting.
Click to expand...
What do you mean, raw link? :confused:

It's a CNN story and I don't see anything in the link address that is concerning.

I imagine the accused has a lot of PhD knowledge he will be bringing up with his defense attorneys.

From the link:
Genetic genealogy is a practice that blends DNA analysis in the lab with genealogical research, such as tracing a person’s family tree.

Genetic testing companies like 23AndMe and Ancestry have made it easy for millions of people to take at-home DNA tests and learn more about their heritage, families and health traits. Neither site allows members of the public or law enforcement to access their database of genetic knowledge.
Click to expand...
It's right up there with trace DNA, definitely science but without all the details being sorted out for courts of law yet.
 
It wasn't quite clear to me what sort of defence he might be preparing unless it's "Yeah, you got me, but you didn't do it in a way I think you should have so it's not fair".
 
Skeptical Greg said:
They used DNA evidence to identify the suspect, but they don't intend to use that evidence for the trial.

The trial should be interesting
Click to expand...

They had already identified him as a suspect. They used investigative genetic genealogy from DNA recovered from the trash to further verify their suspicions. That led to them getting a warrant, but they did not use the DNA evidence to get the warrant. They probably did that DNA analysis to confirm their suspicions to themselves and to have as backup evidence in case the warrant was denied.

They will not use that genealogical evidence at trial because after the arrest they got a warrant for Kohberger’s DNA and verified a match to the DNA on the sheath. They will rely on that direct DNA evidence at trial and not the genealogical evidence that only reinforced their suspicions prior to arrest. The genealogical evidence became essentially irrelevant once they had a match with Kohberger’s DNA.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
It wasn't quite clear to me what sort of defence he might be preparing unless it's "Yeah, you got me, but you didn't do it in a way I think you should have so it's not fair".
Click to expand...

I expect the approach will be to argue that the prosecution has not met the high burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution will probably show the known facts about the murders, the known facts about Kohberger, and how those link up.

The defense will probably present things from a perspective of the investigation that led to Kohberger being identified as a suspect. The will argue that guesses and assumptions and confirmation bias led investigators down that path. A car that is probably associated with the murders, a guess that his car is the same car, a police report that appears to be associated with that car, a phone number that appears on that report, an assumption that Kohberger was driving that car that night, genealogical DNA evidence that casts a wide net where Kohberger was included but was not an exclusive match.

The defense will argue that there were certain guess made in each step, which when added together constitute reasonable doubt. That investigations cherry picked certain evidence to match their pre-conceived assumptions that made it look like there were remarkable coincidences when those things were actually quite ordinary.

That isn't a super strong argument in itself, but it sets up the defenses big argument that prosecution has presented absolutely no evidence that Kohberger was at the scene of the murder. They have a sheath that he had touched at some point. A car that is similar to his. His phone (but not him or even his car) was tracked in the general area at the time (but not to the location of the murder). A witness who can't positively identify Kohberger
and only matches a vague subjective description. They have no motive. And that is it. Nothing that shows that it was actually him in that house. It is reasonable that it could have been anybody with a similar car who happened to have a sheath that he had touched at some point. Reasonable doubt.

The defense might even suggest that it is possible that somebody stole his car with his phone and knife sheath in it and committed the murders and returned the car. They don't have to prove that is what happened. The prosecution has the burden to prove that is not a possibility, otherwise there is reasonable doubt.

It is then up to the jury to decide whether the evidence is conclusive enough for conviction to send a person to prison for life, or whether the lack of evidence that he was actually there and other possible scenarios constitute reasonable doubt.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
What do you mean, raw link? :confused:
Click to expand...

The entirety of the visible text in that post was:
Code: 
New update - https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/28/us/id...ogy/index.html
That's a "raw link": just the URL with zero context or content. At the bare minimum, the poster should say why the link is worth clicking on.

There is a proper way to format links on this forum. but it's probably cumbersome for someone using a mobile device. However, one could at least post the article's headline:

A Better Post said:
A hearing in the Idaho student killings case focuses on genetic genealogy. Here’s why that may be important
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/28/us/idaho-student-killings-genetic-genealogy/index.html
Click to expand...
 
Annie Le and secondary transfer of DNA

Richard Clark murdered Yale graduate student Annie Le over ten years ago, and there is no doubt about his guilt. My understanding is that her body was placed in an alcove behind a partition or wall of some sort. Yet her underwear had a workman's DNA on it, someone who had been in the building. This would ordinarily be probative evidence, except that he was dead by the time of her murder, himself a probable victim of murder. The most probable explanation is that the workman left his DNA in this space, which did not degrade (controlled humidity; lack of sunlight?). It was then transferred to Ms. Lee's body. This example may or may not have much bearing on the present case, but it is a good illustration of the principle that the existence of a DNA profile does not itself provide information on how or when it was transferred.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom