Law&Crime Sidebar - Bryan Kohberger’s Lawyers Shred ‘Flaws’ in DNA Evidence Linking Him to Idaho Student Murders

Episode Date: August 14, 2023

Bryan Kohberger’s defense team is challenging evidence used to charge him with the murders of four University of Idaho college students. Investigators used genetic genealogy to link Kohberger to the brutal stabbings using DNA from a knife sheath found at the crime scene. Kohberger’s attorneys claim the genealogical testing is flawed and unreliable. The Law&Crime Network’s Angenette Levy breaks down the latest development in the Idaho four murders case with famed Philadelphia defense attorney Fred Perri.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Check out the True Crime Garage podcast for the most captivating crime-related stories. Listen on Apple: https://apple.co/44T6XrOLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergWriting & Video Editing - Michael DeiningerGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa Bein & Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieThey Walk Among AmericaDevil In The DormThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that

will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. These are critical, relevant materials, all of them, including the police train records. They're necessary for us to prepare and present our events. They're necessary for us to be our investigation. A legal war of words has broken out over how police in Idaho identified Brian Coburger as a suspect in the murders of four college students. We discuss whether his attorneys should get the genetic genealogy information that led police to Coburger's doorstep. Hey, are you looking for some more true crime content?

Are you an armchair detective? It's okay. A lot of us are. Well, if you haven't already, you got to. to check out the True Crime Garage podcast, which is probably going to be your next binge listen. Why? Well, each week, the garage guys cover a new case featuring missing persons cases, cold cases, solve stories, and serial killer profiles, all while sitting back and having a drink or two.

What's better than that? Now, you can listen to the True Crime Garage podcast on Apple, Spotify, and all of the best podcast listening apps. For more information, you can go to True Crime Garage.com. Welcome back to Sidebar here on Law and Crime. I'm Ann Jeanette Levy. Brian Coburger's attorneys are fighting tooth and nail to see the genetic genealogy information that the FBI used to identify Coburger as a potential suspect. According to police, it started with an unknown male's DNA being found on a K-bar knife sheath that was laying next to Maddie Mogan's body. Police couldn't get a hit from CODIS, the DNA database for

known felons. So they used genetic genealogy to identify Coburger that led detectives to his father, in Pennsylvania and Coburger's arrest. Coburger has pleaded not guilty to the murders of Maddie Mogan, Cayley Gonsolvis, Ethan Chapin, and Zana Kernodal. Coburger's attorneys want the prosecution to turn over the investigative genetic genealogy information the FBI used to ID Coburger as a possible suspect. The prosecution says it shouldn't be turned over because it's simply a tip. But now Coburger has a genetic genealogy expert named Leah Larkin who has filed an affidavit who says she's aware of errors that can occur in genetic genealogy, including terms of service violations for some databases

and sending the wrong profile to the wrong client. And let me tell you, the investigative genetic genealogy in this case was incredibly important because until that work had been completed, the police really didn't have much to go on. They had video of a white Hyundai Allantra that they believed was made between a certain set of years and an unknown male DNA profile. Joining me to discuss this battle over the investigative genetic genealogy records in this case

is Fred Perry. He is a defense attorney who's represented high profile defendants, some rappers, and other people. Fred, welcome back to Sidebar. Thanks for coming on. My pleasure. Thank you. Fred is a criminal defense attorney, somebody who's represented defendants charged in some pretty high profile matters. And just as a defense attorney in general, what is your take upon reading the documents and this argument by the state that hey this is a tip it's a lead we shouldn't have to turn this over to the defense well it's very common practice in every jurisdiction that the prosecution needs to disclose their evidence that they intend to present at a criminal trial and it's it's surprising to me that they're trying to preclude the production of this information in a case like this if you think about it one of my favorite movies is my cousin Vinnie. When Joe Pesci finds out that he has the right to have the prosecutor turn over their evidence in the case, he asks the prosecutor and he says, here's my file. He says, sure, here's my whole file. And that's what a good prosecutor should do.

They shouldn't try to hide anything. They should turn over evidence that they intend to introduce a trial. Obviously they have obligation to turn over any potential exculpatory evidence as well. So I really don't understand the prosecution's theory of withholding this information. We've interviewed some genetic genealogy experts in the past. Most notably, C.C. Moore, she has a show about this stuff. And she, when this first came out in January, this speculation and, you know, leaked information that they used genetic genealogy to identify Coburger as a suspect, she had told me, well, we never have to produce this in court, you know, something to that effect.

I'm paraphrasing what she said. But it seems to me, if you're considering this and arguing that this is a tip and that it's a lead, it should be turned over to the defense because they received more than 9,000 tips into the FBI tip line. I would assume all of those would be turned over as well so the defense could review and see if there was exculpatory information in those tips and leads. Yeah, I mean, as we've discussed before, this is a capital murder case. and if I were sitting in the defense attorney's chair in this case, I'd be fighting like heck to get this information.

I don't see any problem with the prosecution turning this information over, whether it leads to exculpatory information or not. It should be provided. And the judge in this case has discretion like most judges do. He can order a protective order to be put in place here and order that the defense cannot disclose this information to anyone other than the defense. in his in their presence, his or her presence of counsel, or any investigative team that might be working on the case. And that, that I think would cure any concerns that the prosecution

has in this case. I think they can turn it over under a protective order that it's not to be disclosed and disseminated to the public. I'm going to get into the weeds just a little bit here. And I'll paraphrase what the state's argument is. And basically the state is saying, look, the FBI performed this work. They did it in compliance with Department of Justice protocols, and they didn't really keep the information they developed. They kind of unplugged their key from the portal or what have you after they were done, and there's no documentation on that. Does that seem unusual to you? Yeah, it does a bit. And again, that's easily cured with the court ruling that we can have an evidentiary hearing on the issue and have a pretrial hearing and question

the agents about how they went about their business and how they recovered certain evidence because this is an important piece of evidence in this case. And the defense has a right to have their expert review the process of retrieving the evidence from the crime scene, chain of custody issues, how the genealogy was done, the tips that led to the defendant in this case. And I think it's appropriate ask for the defense. I don't see a problem with it. This investigative genetic genealogy work or technique has been around for several years now.

And it seems almost like a new friend here where it's being used in court, but oftentimes the laws are written for long before this. So it's not going to be included in a lot of statutes, state statutes and things like that. So as evidence evolves, the statutes and requirements have to, I guess, evolve along with that. And it often doesn't. So do you see investigative genetic genealogy that is something that may come under scrutiny in the future in these criminal cases and something where maybe there needs to be something written into the state statutes about it? Well, obviously, the science behind the IGG is well beyond my pay grade. Sure. I mean, I would tend to agree with you that the law is ever evolving in this area.

And I think what will happen is lawyers, either prosecutors or defense attorneys will have to take appeals from certain rulings by courts. And the appellate courts and the state Supreme Courts are going to have to make certain decisions regarding the disclosure of this evidence, the introduction of this evidence, the challenges to this evidence, how experts are used in this area. And I agree with you. It will be, it is a new frontier and it will be ever changing. The state kind of argues that it was a tip or a lead, but really, What matters is the fact that the DNA on the sheath, on the knife sheath, was a statistical match to Koeberger once they were able to be led to him through the IgG. And they took a sample from him with a buckle swab compared it to the DNA on the sheath.

And it was a statistical match. What do you make of that argument? I mean, obviously, the DNA is not going to lie. But I would assume the defense is going to try to argue or present. information, testimony at trial that, I don't know, there could have been contamination. There could have been other things going on. And that's the purpose of having an expert testify on behalf of a defendant or review the case on behalf of a defendant. If the expert is not able to challenge, as you said, a statistical match or show that there was any contamination or show that

there was some bump in the road as far as the retrieval and the chain of custody and things like that if their defense expert is not able to raise any issue, any credible issue in a trial in this case, then, you know, statistical match is a statistical match, and that might be just the end of it there. This trial is scheduled to begin in October. October 2nd is when jury selection is supposed to start. It's a capital case, as we've mentioned. And it's interesting to me in one of the recent filings, Ann Taylor, the league counsel for Brian Coburger, basically accuses the state of trying to get Coburger to waive his speedy trial rights by slow walking, the discovery and things like that. And she said in her latest filing, it's Mr. Coburger's decision and his

decision alone, whether or not to waive his rights to a speedy trial. What do you think of that? I mean, it almost sounds like she's saying, this is his decision. He wants a speedy trial. Yeah, we know it's a lot of information to wade through, but this is where we are. So do you think that they should be waiving the speedy trial and maybe pumping the brakes a little bit? We've discussed this previously, and, you know, this is a big case to be pushing and racing to trial. The defendant may not understand that. He may just want to get to trial as quickly as possible, but if I were preparing this case and if there was no delay, being caused by the prosecution, I would want to take my time and go through this.

We're talking about these IGG studies and all that process, and our expert needs time. And I'm sure counsel for the defendant has other matters on their plate. So it's kind of hard to just race this thing to trial. You have to start talking about potential mitigation evidence for a sentencing hearing if he is found guilty of a crime that leads to a, you know, a capital murder sentencing hearing. So I think you ought to pump the brakes, but that's just me. But yeah, it's up to the defendant to make that decision. So have you ever been in a situation where the defendant said, I want a speedy trial,

and this is what we're doing. And you kind of were forced into that position to have to prepare so quickly for a big case? Or I think you would have to have a conversation with your client and say, This is just a lot. We can't have endless resources to devote to this every waking hour of the day. I've had to have that tough conversation with clients periodically. And I will never go begin a trial unless I am fully prepared myself. If we have an investigator working, if we have witnesses that we need to present,

I will never start a trial that I'm not prepared to go to war with. So I have had these conversations with my clients and said, hey, listen, you know, we need some time and I need some time and you're going to have to sit tight until we get this thing ready. That's it for this edition of Law and Crimes Sidebar podcast. You can listen to and download Sidebar on Apple, Spotify, Google, and wherever else you get your podcasts. And of course, you can always watch it on Law and Crimes YouTube channel. I'm Ann Jeanette Levy, and we'll see you next time.

You can binge all episodes of this Law and Crime series, Add Free right now on Wonderry Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.