����vlog

More than two years after a quadruple homicide devastated Moscow, Idaho, a judge unsealed the transcript of a recent hearing in the case against Bryan Kohberger – the man accused of stabbing four students to death in an off-campus home.The hearing, which was closed to the public, came after defense attorney Anne Taylor claimed investigators acted inappropriately when using investigative genetic genealogy to try to isolate a suspect.Investigative genetic genealogy, or IGG, is a relatively new forensic technique combining DNA analysis with genealogical research. Authorities can take an unknown suspect’s DNA profile and upload it to a public database to learn about the suspect’s family members. Investigators can use that information and other evidence to build a family tree and identify potential suspects.But the defense’s attempt to get a judge to suppress the IGG evidence failed. And Kohberger’s murder trial is expected to begin this summer – with the prosecution seeking the death penalty if the 30-year-old is convicted.Due to a wide-ranging gag order, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and attorneys for victims’ families and witnesses are prohibited from saying anything publicly, aside from what is already in the public record.Here are some of the new details revealed from the transcript of the closed-door hearing:Detective learned Kohberger’s name only after genetic genealogyA lead detective in the case, Moscow Police Detective Cpl. Brett Payne, said he didn’t hear Bryan Kohberger’s name mentioned until Dec. 19, 2022 – more than a month after the killings.“That was a result of investigative genetic genealogy that was being undertaken by the FBI. We had a phone call that evening, and we were told Bryan Kohberger’s name,” Payne testified.But IGG wasn’t cited in a probable cause affidavitPayne acknowledged he didn’t mention the investigative genetic genealogy in a probable cause affidavit for Kohberger.“What led to that decision?” Taylor asked.“That decision was a collaborative decision,” the detective responded. “We made that decision in an effort to independently verify the information that was provided to us as a tip from the FBI, in much the same way we would any other tip in law enforcement. So it was not in any way meant to obfuscate any sort of information, it was simply can we validate Mr. Kohberger’s involvement in this incident or can we not. That was it.”“As a group effort, you decided to intentionally leave that out of your affidavit?” Taylor asked.“Yes, ma’am,” Payne responded.Only one person’s DNA was detected on a knife sheathDNA testing on parts of a knife sheath detected a single source, said Rylene Nowlin, an Idaho State Police forensic laboratory manager.The lab tested samples from the knife sheath for “touch DNA” – which can come in the form of skin cells that are shed on items being touched.An analyst swabbed “the entire leather portion of the strap, both top and bottom, and then the underside of the button,” Nowlin testified. “She did not swab the top of the button because that was determined to be the most likely place for fingerprints to be found.”Idaho authorities traveled with the DNA to TexasIdaho State Police had a contract with Houston-based Othram laboratory for certain types of forensic work, Nowlin said. Othram specializes in DNA sequencing combined with genealogy mapping.“That DNA sample was delivered by Moscow Police Department in person to them at Othram labs,” Idaho State Police Laboratory System Director Matthew Gamette testified.“I accompanied the officer from Boise down to Houston and down to the Othram laboratory. I didn’t have possession of the sample, but I was with the investigator that did.”After Idaho authorities delivered the DNA sample, Gamette stayed in touch with Othram “about what type of analysis we were asking them to do, also what type of searching,” he said.“I remember they asked specifically for consent to do certain types of searching. We had to authorize things through memos and whatnot of them doing certain searching, specifically I believe it was FamilyTreeDNA that they needed an authorization for,” said Gamette.Many popular genealogy sites don’t allow law enforcement searchesFamilyTreeDNA is one of two main genealogical databases that allow searching by law enforcement, Payne said.Another genealogical database that law enforcement can use is GEDMatch PRO, genetic genealogist Leah Larkin testified.“Those are the only two databases of any significant size that allow searching,” Larkin said.“Ancestry forbids it, 23andMe forbids it, MyHeritage forbids it.”Many of the biggest genealogy sites cater to customers who simply want to know about their ancestry – and might not want their DNA data to potentially be used by law enforcement.In recent years, after law enforcement used some of the most popular genealogy sites for criminal investigations, many companies changed their terms of service.An expert claims authorities used an unauthorized databaseOthram, the lab company in Texas, stopped its work for the case on Dec. 10, 2022, Taylor said. “The FBI took over, and we’ve heard that by Dec. 19, nine days later, they’d made an identification,” the attorney said.That timeline is significant “because Othram’s matches were, as in their own words in their report, those matches were low,” Larkin testified.She noted Othram had recommended testing four brothers “to get more information.”But “if you went out and if you approached those men, and even if one of them said, yes, you can test my DNA, the testing itself would have taken some time; getting a kit to a person, getting the spit, sending it into the lab, having it analyzed. And it wouldn’t have led to the crime scene profile because it was the wrong family branch,” Larkin testified.“So going from low matches to an ID or at least a tip, whatever they were calling it, within nine days, that right there told me they had gone into a database they were not supposed to be in.”CNN has reached out to the FBI for a response to the accusation that it used a genealogical database inappropriately. Prosecutors did not directly respond to that claim during the hearing.Larkin said she also saw “screenshots from GEDMatch” in email communications.Unlike GEDMatch PRO, which is smaller and allows law enforcement searches, “GEDMatch is just a super open database” and does not allow searches for criminal investigations, Larkin said. GEDMatch has far more users, and “any kit in the system that is public, you can see their matches.”“So if you are in GEDMatch and I am in GEDMatch and let’s say we were cousins, I could go in and look at my kit and I would see you in my match list, but I could also go into your kit and see me in your match list,” Larkin testified.In GEDMatch PRO, law enforcement might not see those same matches.Eventually, the FBI “admitted they had uploaded to MyHeritage” – a database off limits to law enforcement, Larkin said, citing a document shared with the court.What happens nextKohberger’s trial is expected to begin in August and last several months. Prosecutors have said they will seek the death penalty if Kohberger is convicted.In the meantime, the families of victims Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin continue the long wait to learn the suspect’s fate.But Goncalves’ family expressed relief that the judge did not suppress the genetic genealogy evidence.“We are thankful to the Court for a timely decision and appreciate the work prosecution has put in thus far,” the family posted on Facebook last week.“In the big picture of life, justice is just moments away.”CNN’s Taylor Romine and Eric Levenson contributed to this report.