Latest / Crime Stories with Nancy Grace / Idaho Student Slay Suspect Bryan Kohberger's Defense Claims OTHER MALE DNA FOUND AT SCENE

Transcript

Idaho Student Slay Suspect Bryan Kohberger's Defense Claims OTHER MALE DNA FOUND AT SCENE · Crime Stories with Nancy Grace

• 0:05
  Speaker 1: Crime Stories with Nancy Grease.
• 0:13
  Speaker 2: Bonschell in the prosecution of Brian Coburger in the slaughters
• 0:19
  Speaker 2: of four Beautiful University Idaho students. In the last days
• 0:25
  Speaker 2: we learn, the defense for Brian Coburger has asserted that
• 0:31
  Speaker 2: male DNA belonging to at least three other males other
• 0:39
  Speaker 2: than Brian Coburger has been found at the crime sat repeat.
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: According to the defense, DNA belonging to some other guy
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: other than Coburger has been found at the murder scene.
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: Is this a torpedo to the state. I'm Nancy Grace.
• 1:02
  Speaker 2: This is Crime Stories. Thank you for being with us
• 1:04
  Speaker 2: here at Foxination and series sixem one eleven. First of all,
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: take a listen to our friendsic km VT, a.
• 1:11
  Speaker 3: Lawyer for suspect Brian Colberger, filed a court dogment that
• 1:14
  Speaker 3: says no connection exists between Colberger and the four victims.
• 1:18
  Speaker 3: The defense argued investigators found DNA evidence of two other
• 1:22
  Speaker 3: men at the house where the victims died last November,
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: and Kolberger's lawyer argued the defense has been kept in
• 1:28
  Speaker 3: the dark about testing done on those samples and the
• 1:31
  Speaker 3: genetic genealogy method used to link Colberger to the murders.
• 1:34
  Speaker 3: Prosecutors have argued Colberger has no right to FBI data
• 1:38
  Speaker 3: collected from the method.
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: I have a really hard time believing the defense has
• 1:42
  Speaker 2: evidence being withheld from them about the DNA, because they're
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: the ones that have brought up the allegation that DNA
• 1:50
  Speaker 2: belonging to three other guys has been found at the scene.
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: Joining me an all star panel, But first I want
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: to go to Alexey Petrovitch, host for Live Now from
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: and you can find that at livenow Fox dot com. Alexia,
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: thank you so much for being with us. You've been
• 2:07
  Speaker 2: on the case from the very beginning. Now we just
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: heard the number two two other guys? Where is I
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: always called it the sad defense. Some other dude did it.
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: We're hearing now that DNA from three other guys, not two,
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: but three has been found at the scene. Is it
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: a torpedo to the state. I'm not so sure that
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: it is. But you tell me, Alexia, where's the DNA
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: coming from?
• 2:33
  Speaker 4: Well, Nancy, of course the DNA that the defense is
• 2:36
  Speaker 4: now bringing up. Anything that they can say that will
• 2:39
  Speaker 4: help their case is relevant at this point.
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: Oh girls, stop stop. Alexiya Petrovitch, you are so right.
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: You know, my husband always says, I'm like, why does
• 2:52
  Speaker 2: so and so do so and so, And he always says,
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: it's a right. On a sinking ship, they'll grab onto
• 2:58
  Speaker 2: anything just to try to live. So I'm so glad
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: you said that, But there's always this scary spectacle possibility
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: that maybe they're right. Okay, sorry, go ahead. I just
• 3:10
  Speaker 2: had to get the rat on the sinking ship thing
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: out there going.
• 3:14
  Speaker 4: Now, that's a great, great observation. And for them to
• 3:17
  Speaker 4: be able to show jurors at some point that there
• 3:21
  Speaker 4: were three other bits of DNA at the scene, two
• 3:24
  Speaker 4: inside of the home and another bit of DNA found
• 3:27
  Speaker 4: on a glove outside of the home days after the murder,
• 3:30
  Speaker 4: that could cast reasonable doubt forgers to think that maybe
• 3:34
  Speaker 4: there were other people that police didn't look enough into
• 3:37
  Speaker 4: outside of Brian Coberger. At this point, they continue to
• 3:41
  Speaker 4: say that there was no connection between him and the victims.
• 3:44
  Speaker 4: So you have to remember that the biggest piece of
• 3:46
  Speaker 4: evidence still remains the DNA on the knife sheet that
• 3:49
  Speaker 4: was not only found at the crime scene, but also
• 3:52
  Speaker 4: underneath the body of one of the victims, Matty Mogan.
• 3:55
  Speaker 4: And it was not only on the knife sheet case.
• 3:58
  Speaker 4: But it was also on the button of that knife sheet.
• 4:01
  Speaker 4: You think about it, whoever did this, whoever committed this crime.
• 4:05
  Speaker 4: Obviously prosecutor say it's coburger, touched the knife sheet, took
• 4:09
  Speaker 4: it off, touch that button piece on the nice sheaf
• 4:12
  Speaker 4: case and that was found directly under a victim at
• 4:17
  Speaker 4: the crime.
• 4:17
  Speaker 2: Then okay, I'm dissecting everything you just said because that
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: was a lot of information. First of all, there's so
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: many places to go from what you just said. But
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: first I want to clarify, not that you're wrong, you're right,
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: but I want you to clarify what you're talking about
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: to everybody that hasn't seen the knife sheet when you
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: say DNA was found on the button.
• 4:40
  Speaker 4: So a knife sheaf case is essentially a slip that
• 4:44
  Speaker 4: goes over it. So when you take it out of
• 4:46
  Speaker 4: the case, there's a button that holds it in place.
• 4:49
  Speaker 5: They had to pop.
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: Off that button. Give me like a snap, Yes, a snap?
• 4:53
  Speaker 2: So is it a snap hold on? Chris mcdunna joining me,
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: Director the Cold Case Foundation, former homicide detective, has investigated
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: over three hundred homicide host of the Interview Room on YouTube,
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: which is where I found him. Chris is it a
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: snap or a button. It's a snap, right.
• 5:12
  Speaker 5: Yeah, it's a snap.
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: Okay, hold on, hold on, guys. I know you may
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: think it's crazy. I had never really observed that many
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: people walking around with a knife sheath on their waist
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: until my twins went to Scout camp. And of course,
• 5:29
  Speaker 2: when I heard Scout camp, I'm like, oh no, nobody's
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: going to Scout camp without me there to guard over them.
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: So I made my husband take the volunteer train and
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: go along with me, and we went as volunteers to
• 5:42
  Speaker 2: help every adult male and a lot of the young boys.
• 5:50
  Speaker 2: Lucy was there too, because girls can now get their
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: Eagle Scout as well. But they all had nice seats
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: on their belt, and I thought that was a little excessive,
• 6:01
  Speaker 2: but once we started all the classes, they were really
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: using them to cut things and make fires and just
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: all sorts of things. So the snap has got to
• 6:15
  Speaker 2: be something easy. It gives you easy access to the knife.
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: And there's usually everyone that I looked at because in
• 6:25
  Speaker 2: most of my knife murders, nobody had a sheath. There
• 6:28
  Speaker 2: are a lot of switchblade murders and kitchen knife murders
• 6:31
  Speaker 2: no sheath, but in every sheath that I saw there,
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: and since the coburger cases happen, I now of course
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: research them. There's a flap of leather or fake leather
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: that goes over the top of the knife and snaps
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: on the front side of that knife sheath. So in
• 6:50
  Speaker 2: order to access the knife, you have to grab it.
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: Like you're hearing Alexeiya Petrovitch described, you grab the nap
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: and pull it off, and then when you snap it back,
• 7:00
  Speaker 2: you touch it again. Do I have that right, Chris McDonough.
• 7:04
  Speaker 6: You absolutely do, Nancy, And typically it takes two hands
• 7:08
  Speaker 6: to do that because you have to hold the receiving
• 7:11
  Speaker 6: end and then push on the snap end. So this
• 7:17
  Speaker 6: DNA on that snap is you know, the elephant in
• 7:20
  Speaker 6: the living room for the defense team here. And that's
• 7:24
  Speaker 6: why we see the two declarations that were declared in
• 7:27
  Speaker 6: reference to the DNA collection processing and the lab processing.
• 7:33
  Speaker 6: Obviously one from the gal out of California, out of
• 7:37
  Speaker 6: Berkeley and then eventually out of Cornell and then the
• 7:40
  Speaker 6: other attorney out of Maryland. They're going to attack. They're
• 7:46
  Speaker 6: on the attack, you know.
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: Hold on. Alesiya Petrovitch joining us from Live Now at Fox,
• 7:53
  Speaker 2: Tara Mallick is with us, high profile lawyer out of
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: the Coburger jurisdiction which is Idaho and partner of Smith
• 8:01
  Speaker 2: and Malick law firm. Tur thank you for being with us.
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: You know what, I would always work late at the
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: District Attorney's office and there'd be nobody else there by
• 8:12
  Speaker 2: the time I finally left, and I typically didn't want
• 8:16
  Speaker 2: to hear any sound like vacuum cleaners or anything because
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: I've been trying to read something. And I will never
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: forget the whoosh of defense motions coming under my door.
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: I don't know how they got in the DA's office,
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: but that would happen a lot at night, and I'd
• 8:31
  Speaker 2: look at the motion. It would be a huge stack
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: of motions and they would many of them would be
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: pro forma like I'm challenging the defendant statement because he
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: didn't have the miranda. I mean, you get that in
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: every single case, but when you get to court and
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: the hearings begin, it's the issues that hurt them the
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: most that they scream the most about. And that is
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: why this DNA just like Alexi just told us that
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: this case may hinge to a large degree on the DNA.
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: That's why they're screaming about it so much because this
• 9:12
  Speaker 2: is the twisting of the knife, pardon the pun to them.
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: This is what's hurting Coburger, is this DNA. He can
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: explain away a lot of the other stuff, a lot
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: of it, but not the DNA. That's the hardest issue
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: for them. Would you agree, Tarah?
• 9:27
  Speaker 7: Absolutely?
• 9:28
  Speaker 8: I mean I think that you know, DNA evidence now
• 9:32
  Speaker 8: is generally relied upon. You know, the general public knows
• 9:37
  Speaker 8: what DNA evidence is. It is the strongest piece of
• 9:41
  Speaker 8: evidence I think against Coberghre, especially in the case, you know,
• 9:45
  Speaker 8: in a case like this where you don't have any
• 9:47
  Speaker 8: sort of admission from him or a partial admission from him.
• 9:51
  Speaker 8: So they're going to go after the strongest piece of evidence,
• 9:54
  Speaker 8: and they're going to try and poke whatever holes they can.
• 9:58
  Speaker 8: You know, how did you get the DNA evidence? Are
• 10:00
  Speaker 8: you sure it's the right person? How many people did
• 10:03
  Speaker 8: you check? You know, what's the methodology of doing it?
• 10:06
  Speaker 5: So I'm not.
• 10:07
  Speaker 8: Surprised that they're going after the DNA evidence first. Now,
• 10:10
  Speaker 8: whether or not they're going to be successful here big
• 10:13
  Speaker 8: question that remains to be seen. And just because there's
• 10:16
  Speaker 8: DNA evidence from you know, a couple other people in
• 10:20
  Speaker 8: that house doesn't necessarily think the state's case. You know,
• 10:24
  Speaker 8: what we understand from this house is that it was
• 10:27
  Speaker 8: kind of a party house, as a typical college house.
• 10:29
  Speaker 8: People were in and out all the time, so not surprising.
• 10:34
  Speaker 8: It's certainly an area that the prosecution will have to
• 10:36
  Speaker 8: ultimately explain if they get all the way to trial,
• 10:40
  Speaker 8: but something that the prosecution does need to keep their
• 10:42
  Speaker 8: eye on and really work hard to combat that defense strategy.
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: Time Stories with Nancy Grace.
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: I want to go back to Alexia Petrovitchose for Live
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: Now at Fox. Alexia, the reason I'm so interested in
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: where this other male DNA was found. Let me give
• 11:15
  Speaker 2: you an example I learned working with jury's Rather than,
• 11:19
  Speaker 2: for instance, read the black and white letter of the law,
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: it's easier to give an example for everybody. So, Alexia,
• 11:27
  Speaker 2: we've had painters in our house. Okay, so let's just
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: pretend my husband has found knife dead. Poor David. He's
• 11:34
  Speaker 2: been killed so many times in the bedroom, and of
• 11:38
  Speaker 2: course everybody thinks it's me because it's always the spouse
• 11:41
  Speaker 2: or the ex or some love relationship. But I can
• 11:46
  Speaker 2: prove that another unknown male DNA has been found in
• 11:52
  Speaker 2: the bedroom where he was stabbed dead. Sorry, David, but
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: as it turns out, where the DNA is, the painters
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: would have removed light switches to paint around the light switch.
• 12:11
  Speaker 2: What if the male DNA was back on the light switch.
• 12:15
  Speaker 2: So yes, DNA is found at the crime scene, but
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: on the light switch, So who cares? Do we know
• 12:24
  Speaker 2: where the DNA was found? I know on one glove
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: found outside, which may have been the glove you identify
• 12:31
  Speaker 2: Chris McDonough. But where what about the other two DNA samples? Alexia?
• 12:37
  Speaker 4: All that we've heard so far is that two pieces
• 12:40
  Speaker 4: of DNA were found inside of the house near the
• 12:43
  Speaker 4: crime scene. The only other detail outside of that is
• 12:46
  Speaker 4: that there was a third piece of DNA found outside
• 12:48
  Speaker 4: of the house a few days after the murders, and
• 12:51
  Speaker 4: that it was found on a glove. But the defense
• 12:53
  Speaker 4: continues to say, why was this never brought up? You
• 12:56
  Speaker 4: focused your search on Coberger right from the beginning. You
• 12:59
  Speaker 4: were set up on him as your prime suspect in this.
• 13:02
  Speaker 4: But did you interview these other people? Because this is
• 13:05
  Speaker 4: obviously very relevant.
• 13:06
  Speaker 7: To the key.
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: Okay, so how are we going to combat that? Joining me,
• 13:11
  Speaker 2: Doctor Michelle Dupre, forensic pathologist, medical examiner, former detective, and
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: literally she wrote the book Homicide Investigation Field Guide. Doctor
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: Michelle Dupre, How is the steak going to handle this?
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: You've dealt with so many DNA cases.
• 13:29
  Speaker 7: Well, I think that this is really, you know, as
• 13:32
  Speaker 7: we've all sort of said, it's a red herring. This
• 13:34
  Speaker 7: is it's not unusual to find other DNA in the
• 13:37
  Speaker 7: same residence. It's going to be critical where that DNA
• 13:41
  Speaker 7: was found. And I think that they're going to really
• 13:43
  Speaker 7: play up the information that Coburger's DNA was found not
• 13:48
  Speaker 7: just at the crime scene, but where the victim was.
• 13:52
  Speaker 7: That's what's important. If this other DNA is found outside
• 13:56
  Speaker 7: on a glove or downstairs in the kitchen, or wherever
• 13:59
  Speaker 7: it may have been, that's going to be very important.
• 14:01
  Speaker 7: The location will be very important.
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: Location, location, location, Chris mcdonok, you've investigated over three hundred
• 14:07
  Speaker 2: homicide jump.
• 14:09
  Speaker 6: In so Nancy, I think the interesting thing here is
• 14:13
  Speaker 6: if they follow the investigative protocol of asking why versus
• 14:19
  Speaker 6: you know, how, then what we're going to see is
• 14:23
  Speaker 6: the question always arises, why is Coburg's DNA on that
• 14:29
  Speaker 6: snap in that bedroom? Now the glove outside that was
• 14:35
  Speaker 6: from Thanksgiving Day. I was up there, you know, looking
• 14:40
  Speaker 6: at the crime scene. I observed this glove outside behind
• 14:44
  Speaker 6: the tape. I notified an officer that was there. They
• 14:46
  Speaker 6: came over and eventually collected it. So the other piece
• 14:53
  Speaker 6: of this is the video from the body camera of
• 14:56
  Speaker 6: the calls of loud party at that house. So when
• 15:02
  Speaker 6: the officers get there, we see Mattie, she comes out,
• 15:05
  Speaker 6: you know, makes contact with the police, and you can
• 15:08
  Speaker 6: see another male and unknown mail with her. So I think,
• 15:12
  Speaker 6: you know, to doctor Duprees's point there, it is a
• 15:14
  Speaker 6: red herring because there's going to be a lot of
• 15:17
  Speaker 6: male DNA in that house, and we have two videos
• 15:21
  Speaker 6: to prove it from the body camera.
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: You're so right, So doctor Bethany Marshall, I'll see this
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: as a double side, two sided coin. Doctor Bethany Marshall
• 15:31
  Speaker 2: is joining us renow psychoanalyst joining us out of Beverly
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: Heels at doctor Bethany Marshall dot com, Doctor Bethany number
• 15:40
  Speaker 2: one at matt Location location location is the other male
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: DNA found on the kitchen island. Is it found on
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: the front door knob. Is it found in one of
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: the bedrooms where the victims are killed. That as you
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: get closer to the scene, to the bodies, it matters more.
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: It becomes more critical. We don't know that much less
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: on a glove outside. I'm not even concerned with an
• 16:11
  Speaker 2: outside glove. When I was there at the scene, I
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: saw a frosty mitten outside, and you know what did
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: that mean? Probably nothing, So that matters a lot. So
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: also we've gotten the fact that the state's going to
• 16:26
  Speaker 2: have to argue it was a party house, and thereby
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: the defenses could and they usually do, make out the
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: girls to be party girls, which has no barrier on
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: this case at all.
• 16:39
  Speaker 5: Nancy, you were so right.
• 16:40
  Speaker 7: My first thought about this.
• 16:41
  Speaker 5: I'm not a crime scene investigator or a homicide detective.
• 16:45
  Speaker 7: I am a.
• 16:46
  Speaker 5: Psychoanalyst, social psychologist, and my first thought was, this is
• 16:50
  Speaker 5: an attempt to discredit these girls. They're going to say
• 16:52
  Speaker 5: that the DNA was semen that was found on the
• 16:55
  Speaker 5: bed or somewhere in the bedroom, and what that's going
• 16:59
  Speaker 5: to do, in the mind of the defense attorneys is
• 17:03
  Speaker 5: discredit the girls, make them seem You said party girls,
• 17:06
  Speaker 5: but I'm gonna say promiscuous, like lots of men were
• 17:10
  Speaker 5: coming in and out. Maybe girls who are in pair, drinking,
• 17:14
  Speaker 5: using drugs. You know, whatever they can do to discredit
• 17:17
  Speaker 5: and humiliate the victim that you know, this is the
• 17:22
  Speaker 5: the seed has such a strong case against Brian Coberger,
• 17:25
  Speaker 5: and there's so much antagonistic set that towards him. You know,
• 17:29
  Speaker 5: I think this could backfire on the defense attorneys if
• 17:32
  Speaker 5: they try to discredit the victims. But what it is
• 17:35
  Speaker 5: going to do for the families, Nancy, is it's going
• 17:38
  Speaker 5: to be painful to hear their daughters being painted as
• 17:44
  Speaker 5: promiscuous as semen in the bed, as all these different
• 17:48
  Speaker 5: men's DNA around the house. You know, it's just it's
• 17:51
  Speaker 5: just it's painful, and it really you know, it's like
• 17:54
  Speaker 5: opening up a health record after a victim is gone,
• 17:57
  Speaker 5: after a victim has died. There's allll kinds of things
• 18:00
  Speaker 5: in there the victim would not have wanted their family
• 18:03
  Speaker 5: or the public to know. So it kind of drags
• 18:05
  Speaker 5: the victims through the mud as well. So too, to
• 18:09
  Speaker 5: maybe the scientists on this panel, it's you know, it's
• 18:14
  Speaker 5: a piece of scientific evidence. To me, it is a
• 18:18
  Speaker 5: story that drags the victims through the mud again and
• 18:23
  Speaker 5: again and again at the family's expense.
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: Guys Not only is there a claim that other male
• 18:30
  Speaker 2: DNA was found at the scene, it may very well
• 18:32
  Speaker 2: be true. The defense is also climbing there is no
• 18:37
  Speaker 2: connection between Coburger and the victims in this case. Take
• 18:42
  Speaker 2: a listen to Aaron McLaughlin at NBC.
• 18:46
  Speaker 9: Coburger's lawyers argue for the release of materials they say
• 18:49
  Speaker 9: they need to defend the suspected killer. Coburger's lawyer also
• 18:54
  Speaker 9: went even further in the court filing, saying, quote, there
• 18:57
  Speaker 9: is no connection between mister Coburger and the victims.
• 19:00
  Speaker 2: There is no.
• 19:01
  Speaker 9: Explanation for the total lack of DNA evidence from the
• 19:04
  Speaker 9: victims in mister Coberger's apartment, home, office, or vehicle.
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: Okay, we're gonna have to deal with that as well.
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: That was an oj Simpson defense as well, that Simpson,
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: if he had been actually guilty, would have been covered
• 19:21
  Speaker 2: in blood. Well, just let me point out that the
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: victim's blood was found on his socks in his bedroom
• 19:28
  Speaker 2: at home, both victims. So how was the blood from
• 19:34
  Speaker 2: both victims on his socks in his bedroom in his home?
• 19:40
  Speaker 2: How that happened? But the defense argued, and they argued
• 19:44
  Speaker 2: it really well, that he should have been covered head
• 19:48
  Speaker 2: to toe with blood. And that's what's going to be
• 19:50
  Speaker 2: argued here. Okay, back to you, Chris McDonough, how is
• 19:56
  Speaker 2: this going to go down that as of right now,
• 19:59
  Speaker 2: we don't I don't know of any of the victims
• 20:02
  Speaker 2: DNA blood or anything else found in his car or apartment.
• 20:08
  Speaker 6: Well, right now, as we know, Nancy, that the prosecution
• 20:12
  Speaker 6: has obviously turned over everything to them. It sounds like
• 20:16
  Speaker 6: because they are, you know, on the offense here. However,
• 20:22
  Speaker 6: they also have to deal with the cellular footprint that
• 20:26
  Speaker 6: ties him to that residence multiple times, twelve times, I believe,
• 20:31
  Speaker 6: as you recall it. And so you know, the fact
• 20:34
  Speaker 6: that there isn't necessarily blood that we know.
• 20:37
  Speaker 2: Of, say that again about the evidence found it the
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: same and say it really slowly. I don't want that
• 20:44
  Speaker 2: to get lost in the sauce.
• 20:46
  Speaker 6: Yeah, So that they also have a motion to go
• 20:50
  Speaker 6: after the cast team, the FBI agent who collected all
• 20:54
  Speaker 6: the cellular data, which is going to be another huge
• 20:59
  Speaker 6: footprint for him to overcome. And so the fact that
• 21:04
  Speaker 6: there isn't necessarily any transferred blood from the crime scene
• 21:09
  Speaker 6: into a vehicle we have to take into account. He
• 21:12
  Speaker 6: also cleaned that vehicle exceptionally well while he was under surveillance.
• 21:18
  Speaker 6: So they have that testimony of the officers or whoever
• 21:21
  Speaker 6: that surveillance team was to say, yeah, I saw him
• 21:24
  Speaker 6: cleaning that vehicle. So again we go back to that
• 21:27
  Speaker 6: question not to how, but why was he cleaning that vehicle,
• 21:33
  Speaker 6: which is going to be an interesting testimony to hear
• 21:37
  Speaker 6: as the case goes on.
• 21:38
  Speaker 2: You know what I think, Terah Mallik, that it can
• 21:43
  Speaker 2: hurt the state's case. There's no DNA from the victims
• 21:47
  Speaker 2: in his car or his apartment, if that is in
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: fact true.
• 21:51
  Speaker 8: Yeah, I think certainly in the lack of DANNY evidence
• 21:56
  Speaker 8: there weakens the state's case a little bit. You know again,
• 22:00
  Speaker 8: I think that there are ways the state can deal
• 22:02
  Speaker 8: with that. In this case. The timeline, you know, it
• 22:06
  Speaker 8: wasn't that Coburger was arrested right away. Coburger was across
• 22:10
  Speaker 8: the country when he was arrested somewhere else. He certainly
• 22:13
  Speaker 8: had enough time to clean out his car if there
• 22:15
  Speaker 8: was any sort of DNA evidence in there.
• 22:18
  Speaker 5: So the state can.
• 22:19
  Speaker 8: Go and point out things like that to say, yeah,
• 22:23
  Speaker 8: there's no no DNA evidence, for instance, in this car
• 22:26
  Speaker 8: or his apartment. But you know, look at this long delay.
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: You're right, you got this huge long delay. But I
• 22:33
  Speaker 2: also want you to hear our cut five one three
• 22:36
  Speaker 2: from NBAC.
• 22:37
  Speaker 9: A key part of the case Coburger's DNA. While prosecutors
• 22:41
  Speaker 9: say his DNA was at the scene of the murders,
• 22:44
  Speaker 9: Coburger's lawyers argue investigators did not find any victim DNA
• 22:48
  Speaker 9: in his apartment, office, home, or vehicle.
• 22:51
  Speaker 10: There's multiple ways to explain the lack of DNA in
• 22:55
  Speaker 10: his vehicle, in his apartment. There's not a lot of
• 22:57
  Speaker 10: ways to explain his DNA on the sheath of the
• 23:00
  Speaker 10: murder weapon.
• 23:01
  Speaker 9: At the moment, the trial is said to begin October second.
• 23:04
  Speaker 9: Given that this is now a death penalty case, legal
• 23:07
  Speaker 9: experts expect it to be delayed.
• 23:09
  Speaker 2: To you, Chris McDonough joining US former homicide detective, do
• 23:13
  Speaker 2: you agree with Steve Kramer that you just heard his voice?
• 23:16
  Speaker 2: With a former FBI lawyer, There's a lot of ways
• 23:21
  Speaker 2: to explain lack of victim DNA in his car or home.
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: There's not a lot of ways to explain his DNA
• 23:30
  Speaker 2: not just at the scene of the crime, but in
• 23:33
  Speaker 2: the bed with one of the crime victims. Matty Mogan
• 23:37
  Speaker 2: and think about it, Chris McDonough, not only had time
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: passed before the apartment of the car were searched, a
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: lot of time. By the way, he's a criminal procedure specialist.
• 23:51
  Speaker 2: He's getting his PhD in that, don't you know? He
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: basically hermetically sealed himself to go and commit this crime.
• 23:59
  Speaker 2: He have all people would know how to get rid
• 24:02
  Speaker 2: of evidence and as far as the DNA from other
• 24:06
  Speaker 2: males at the crime scene, depending on where it was,
• 24:09
  Speaker 2: they may have been people that were there a lot
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: for parties or friends or studying, who knows what. But Coburger,
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: to our knowledge, had never been there. So why is
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: his DNA there here? You attack whichever prong of that
• 24:24
  Speaker 2: you want, but jump in man, Well.
• 24:26
  Speaker 6: Absolutely, Nancy, I mean how many cases have you had,
• 24:29
  Speaker 6: you know where you you if you had this evidence?
• 24:32
  Speaker 6: I could only imagine how you would argue this in
• 24:35
  Speaker 6: front of the jury, because he's got to be in
• 24:38
  Speaker 6: a place thinking, and the defense knows it. They're they're
• 24:42
  Speaker 6: on the they're on the you know, attack here to
• 24:45
  Speaker 6: to somehow you know, paint this big picture of well,
• 24:49
  Speaker 6: there's nothing else you know, connecting him to that crime scene.
• 24:54
  Speaker 4: A I E.
• 24:55
  Speaker 6: Away from the crime scene. You know, his apartment, his car,
• 24:59
  Speaker 6: et cetera. What there is this huge you know, fifty
• 25:04
  Speaker 6: two point whatever it is octillion, you know this is
• 25:07
  Speaker 6: the guy got to go to another planet and find
• 25:10
  Speaker 6: him under one of these victims. So you know this
• 25:15
  Speaker 6: is this is just you know, they're doing their job,
• 25:18
  Speaker 6: The defense is doing their job. But I think it's
• 25:20
  Speaker 6: going to be a very high bar to overcome because
• 25:24
  Speaker 6: of the other evidence that's going to come supporting Well.
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: I've thought about this, and I hate to get give
• 25:28
  Speaker 2: the defense and the ideas, but it could have been
• 25:31
  Speaker 2: argue that he bought the knife at one of those
• 25:34
  Speaker 2: knife and gun shows, you know, where thousands of people
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: trooped through to either look at stuff, they don't have
• 25:40
  Speaker 2: to buy anything. What if they had touched this evidence
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: and then the knife was stolen. How do we even
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: know it was Coburger's knife? So what if Coburger can
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: argue I went to this knife and gun show, I
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: looked at a lot of knives and a lot of guns.
• 25:57
  Speaker 2: I didn't buy anything. That's where the knife came from.
• 26:01
  Speaker 2: The pert bought the knife after I touched it. I mean,
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: I know it's a stretch, but all you need is
• 26:06
  Speaker 2: one gerrr to hang the whole hang up the whole verdict.
• 26:10
  Speaker 6: Mag Donna, Well, you know, and the odds on that.
• 26:12
  Speaker 6: I'd like to see the odds on that, you know,
• 26:15
  Speaker 6: play out. But you are right, he could argue that.
• 26:19
  Speaker 6: But again it's a very difficult argument because now you
• 26:23
  Speaker 6: have to say that the universe is on schedule and
• 26:26
  Speaker 6: it somehow went from that knife show to underneath that
• 26:30
  Speaker 6: poor victim, and Brian just happened to be the guy
• 26:34
  Speaker 6: you know in the neighborhood twelve separate times through a
• 26:37
  Speaker 6: cell phone, you know technology.
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: Including the night of the murders, and had had to
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: try contact with some of the victims before that and
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: never heard back from them. I mean, just there's just
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: so much. It's all circumstantial. Though this DNA is the
• 26:53
  Speaker 2: strongest thing they've got. And now hold on, I think
• 26:57
  Speaker 2: I heard doctor Bethany trying to jump in.
• 26:59
  Speaker 5: Bethany, Well, I worry about jurors getting confused just hearing
• 27:03
  Speaker 5: one thing that they latch onto, and I think that's
• 27:06
  Speaker 5: what the defense is hoping for. You know, this is
• 27:09
  Speaker 5: a very sophisticated discussion we're all having, but we are
• 27:13
  Speaker 5: all human beings. Where one thing stands out and we
• 27:16
  Speaker 5: think about that one thing again and again. So there's
• 27:19
  Speaker 5: no DNA in the car or his home. There's no
• 27:23
  Speaker 5: DNA in the car or his home. That gets repeated
• 27:26
  Speaker 5: enough times. It's like what the public remembers about the
• 27:31
  Speaker 5: menentous case the father molested them, the father molested them
• 27:36
  Speaker 5: or O. J. Simpson if it's is you must have quit.
• 27:39
  Speaker 5: You know, there are these one sentences that become almost hypnotic,
• 27:45
  Speaker 5: mesmerizing if they get drummed into the brain of the
• 27:49
  Speaker 5: public and of the jurors. And so that's how I
• 27:52
  Speaker 5: think about this, that all this the scientific evidence is
• 27:56
  Speaker 5: one thing, but beliefs that can get inculcated in the
• 28:01
  Speaker 5: jurors or another, and that that may be what the
• 28:04
  Speaker 5: defense is hoping for.
• 28:05
  Speaker 2: Back to Alexia Petrovich, host from Live Now at Fox,
• 28:10
  Speaker 2: I was throwing out the knife and Gun show as
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: an example of some sort of argument the defense can make.
• 28:17
  Speaker 2: But we know that Brian Koberger bought akbar knife from
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: Amazon months before the stabbing of the Idaho students. Now
• 28:29
  Speaker 2: can we match the sheath up to the one he
• 28:32
  Speaker 2: bought on Amazon? Very likely? Alexia Petrovic, can you talk
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: about the kbar knife and knife sheath he bought from
• 28:45
  Speaker 2: Amazon seven months before the stabbings.
• 28:48
  Speaker 4: Well and Nancy, I think that's a huge point that
• 28:51
  Speaker 4: they're going to continue to bring up there. And also
• 28:54
  Speaker 4: the fact that, as was mentioned earlier, the DNA was
• 28:57
  Speaker 4: five point three seven of tillion times more more likely
• 29:00
  Speaker 4: to be coburgers on that night sheet than any other
• 29:04
  Speaker 4: random person from the general population. The defense can say
• 29:07
  Speaker 4: there was no evidence at his apartment, there was no
• 29:10
  Speaker 4: evidence in his car, but it doesn't take away from
• 29:12
  Speaker 4: the fact that it was at the crime scene and
• 29:15
  Speaker 4: in a place that was very difficult to discover under
• 29:18
  Speaker 4: one of the victim's bodies. The attorneys, though at this point,
• 29:22
  Speaker 4: are doing anything they can to try to cast doubt here.
• 29:25
  Speaker 4: They're talking about they don't understand how investigators have been
• 29:29
  Speaker 4: able to identify the suspect's car. But there were other
• 29:32
  Speaker 4: pieces of evidence even outside of the DNA too. There
• 29:35
  Speaker 4: was that cell phone data, There was surveillance video. There
• 29:39
  Speaker 4: was neighbor video that began circulating as well, where you
• 29:42
  Speaker 4: could hear some it was very difficult to listen to,
• 29:45
  Speaker 4: but voices very distantly in the background from the evening
• 29:50
  Speaker 4: that this happened, or the early morning that this happened.
• 29:52
  Speaker 4: So there are other pieces, but the DNA is definitely
• 29:55
  Speaker 4: the most compelling.
• 29:55
  Speaker 7: You're right, Nancy, jump in, Nancy, this is stock. This
• 29:59
  Speaker 7: is very to me. It's very analogous to the Alex
• 30:02
  Speaker 7: Murdoch case. There was a defense answer for everything. But
• 30:06
  Speaker 7: in law enforcement we have the saying that we look
• 30:09
  Speaker 7: at the totality of circumstances, and when we look at everything,
• 30:14
  Speaker 7: the electronic data, the DNA, he bought the k Bar
• 30:17
  Speaker 7: knife akbar knife earlier. When we put everything together, I'm
• 30:21
  Speaker 7: hoping that it's going to be very much like the
• 30:24
  Speaker 7: murder case, that the jury is going to be able
• 30:27
  Speaker 7: to see that, yes, it's circumstantial, but this is just
• 30:30
  Speaker 7: way too many coincidences.
• 30:32
  Speaker 2: The model k bar sounds familiar to many legal eagles
• 30:39
  Speaker 2: following this case. It was a specific k bar sheath
• 30:44
  Speaker 2: left behind at the scene that contained Coburger's DNA on it,
• 30:50
  Speaker 2: and we now know that law enforcement has obtained a
• 30:55
  Speaker 2: record of Coburger purchasing the most crucial piece of evidence
• 31:00
  Speaker 2: so far, a Kbar knife and sheath from Amazon. Now,
• 31:07
  Speaker 2: how likely is it that another exact sheath was found
• 31:16
  Speaker 2: at the scene other than the one he purchased. But
• 31:19
  Speaker 2: are we now facing the horrible possibility that we are
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: losing any other DNA evidence. Take a listen to our
• 31:31
  Speaker 2: cut five, one, eight our friends at crimeonline dot com.
• 31:35
  Speaker 11: The home where four University of Idaho students were murdered
• 31:38
  Speaker 11: has cleaning crews again on site. On Tuesday this week,
• 31:41
  Speaker 11: a large truck was seen at the three story home.
• 31:44
  Speaker 11: The home now belongs to the University of Idaho. It
• 31:46
  Speaker 11: was gifted to the university by the owner. It is
• 31:49
  Speaker 11: slated to be demolished sometime this summer. The cleaning company
• 31:52
  Speaker 11: is removing all the items inside the home to return
• 31:55
  Speaker 11: to the victims' family members ahead of a demolition. No
• 31:58
  Speaker 11: timetable has been said yet, but the process may take
• 32:01
  Speaker 11: several weeks.
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: Crime Stories with Nancy Grace to you, Chris McDonald.
• 32:19
  Speaker 2: You have processed a lot of crime scenes, as have you,
• 32:22
  Speaker 2: Doctor d Pray. What if anything, does this mean professional
• 32:27
  Speaker 2: cleaners back at the scene. If there was any DNA
• 32:31
  Speaker 2: that hasn't been found already, it's gone.
• 32:33
  Speaker 6: Yeah, you know, you know, Nancy, I think that is
• 32:36
  Speaker 6: a mistake, just my personal opinion that that's this is
• 32:40
  Speaker 6: such a high profile case, and you can already see
• 32:44
  Speaker 6: the motions you know, going here.
• 32:47
  Speaker 7: I think it.
• 32:47
  Speaker 6: Would be wise for the prosecution just to hold this
• 32:50
  Speaker 6: scene because they're in there cleaning any biohazard, you know,
• 32:54
  Speaker 6: such as blood or you know, any other fluids to
• 32:57
  Speaker 6: your point that could potentially uh, if they had missed it,
• 33:02
  Speaker 6: there could be something more in there. But more importantly,
• 33:06
  Speaker 6: I think you made the point a while ago about
• 33:10
  Speaker 6: having the jury come down and look at that, because
• 33:13
  Speaker 6: you look how powerful it was in the Ernock case.
• 33:15
  Speaker 6: From what doctor Dupre just said, I think this is
• 33:18
  Speaker 6: going to be as powerful, and to tear it down,
• 33:21
  Speaker 6: in my opinion, I think is a mistake.
• 33:23
  Speaker 7: I agree, I agree, but I think that it's probably
• 33:26
  Speaker 7: already contaminated. That's why the defense would argue.
• 33:29
  Speaker 2: Well contaminated, Yes, But what about the possibility of a
• 33:33
  Speaker 2: jury visiting the crime scene?
• 33:34
  Speaker 7: Absolutely, I think that would be priceless.
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: I think for the state. I think it would benefit
• 33:39
  Speaker 2: the state. Guys. Not only that we're learning of another
• 33:42
  Speaker 2: attack by the defense on the DNA evidence. Take a
• 33:46
  Speaker 2: listen to our cup five zero six our friends at today.
• 33:50
  Speaker 9: In new court documents, Coberger's attorney accusing the State of
• 33:53
  Speaker 9: hiding its entire case by seeking to protect information about
• 33:57
  Speaker 9: the genetic genealogy investigation you say led them to Coburger.
• 34:01
  Speaker 10: The state here is using a relatively new kind of
• 34:04
  Speaker 10: DNA technology. So this is exactly the kind of thing
• 34:07
  Speaker 10: the defense will argue that they need because if this
• 34:10
  Speaker 10: is emerging technology, they need all the facts they can
• 34:14
  Speaker 10: if they're going to challenge.
• 34:15
  Speaker 2: Okay, straight back out to Alexia Petrovich. Alexia, describe the
• 34:23
  Speaker 2: defense motion, Well, give me details regarding their claim that
• 34:29
  Speaker 2: the state is improperly shielding genealogical family tree members from
• 34:36
  Speaker 2: their purview. Also, I'm very, very curious that the defense
• 34:43
  Speaker 2: is also attacking the actual DNA technology that was used,
• 34:48
  Speaker 2: because I don't think it's that new. It's been used
• 34:52
  Speaker 2: in many, many other cases. But let's first start with
• 34:54
  Speaker 2: protecting the genealogical members of Coburger's family tree. Explain what
• 35:00
  Speaker 2: what's happening.
• 35:00
  Speaker 4: So initially the DNA that they had gathered was from
• 35:04
  Speaker 4: his family home and expected it to Coburger's father in this.
• 35:09
  Speaker 4: But then most recently we learned that police had used
• 35:12
  Speaker 4: some of this relatively new and of full genetic genealogy,
• 35:17
  Speaker 4: and the FBI also looked into it and were able
• 35:20
  Speaker 4: to determine that it was a statistical match to Coburger from.
• 35:25
  Speaker 2: A cheek swap.
• 35:27
  Speaker 4: So now the defense is saying, well, you can't do
• 35:29
  Speaker 4: that legally, you're not allowed to do that. You're withholding
• 35:32
  Speaker 4: a lot of evidence in addition to that, and they
• 35:34
  Speaker 4: keep going back to this point of we don't know
• 35:37
  Speaker 4: why they initially focused this investigation on Coborger because of
• 35:41
  Speaker 4: their claims that they didn't have evidence that was tied
• 35:44
  Speaker 4: to the nicktims at Coburger's home, or in his car,
• 35:47
  Speaker 4: or in his office. So they're continuing to argue that
• 35:51
  Speaker 4: they shouldn't even be allowed to use these websites that
• 35:56
  Speaker 4: can connect Coburger in his DNA to these and then
• 36:00
  Speaker 4: going back even further to their initial argument of you
• 36:04
  Speaker 4: don't even have information to explain to us of why
• 36:08
  Speaker 4: Coburg was your prime suspect when you didn't look into
• 36:11
  Speaker 4: other people.
• 36:12
  Speaker 2: So this is a two pronged attack that we're talking
• 36:15
  Speaker 2: about right now. In the Coburger DNA. First of all,
• 36:17
  Speaker 2: they're going to claim, well, somebody else's DNA has been
• 36:20
  Speaker 2: found on the scene, so you can't really say the
• 36:25
  Speaker 2: killer's Coburger. That's the first attack, then they're going to
• 36:27
  Speaker 2: say you didn't investigate the other males whose DNA was
• 36:31
  Speaker 2: found around the house, for one on a glove outside
• 36:36
  Speaker 2: the house, which we think may have been like an
• 36:40
  Speaker 2: outdoor mitten. Those are two attacks on the DNA. The
• 36:44
  Speaker 2: third attack on the DNA is that the state is
• 36:47
  Speaker 2: withholding members of Coburger's distant family tree that were used
• 36:52
  Speaker 2: in the genetic genealogy match to Coburger. The fourth argument
• 36:58
  Speaker 2: is that emerging technol was used. That has not been accepted.
• 37:03
  Speaker 2: That same argument was used for DNA to start with.
• 37:06
  Speaker 2: It was used for fingerprints, it was used for tire casts,
• 37:11
  Speaker 2: it was used for voice identification. Hey, that's too new,
• 37:14
  Speaker 2: we can't do that. Well, that's all BS. You can
• 37:17
  Speaker 2: use it. And the particular DNA technology that was used,
• 37:24
  Speaker 2: in my mind, is not that new. It's been used
• 37:29
  Speaker 2: many many times before. It's called S t R st
• 37:35
  Speaker 2: R analysis, and it's been used over and over. As
• 37:39
  Speaker 2: far as the genetic genealogy argument, that's been used over
• 37:44
  Speaker 2: and over and has been upheld by appellate courts, let
• 37:49
  Speaker 2: me point out the Golden State killer Joseph DiAngelo, that
• 37:52
  Speaker 2: was one of the first times genetic genealogy had been
• 37:55
  Speaker 2: used to identify the defendant. The reaction is, I'm not
• 38:01
  Speaker 2: quite sure how to say this. Let me go to
• 38:03
  Speaker 2: Tara Mallick that this is Coburger's DNA. So regardless of
• 38:12
  Speaker 2: the specific type of test used to identify it, it's
• 38:19
  Speaker 2: his DNA one way or the other. Whether it was
• 38:23
  Speaker 2: a direct let's just say, mitochondrial match through his mother
• 38:28
  Speaker 2: that's accepted in court, or a direct match regarding his father,
• 38:32
  Speaker 2: which we know there was, whether they use genetic genealogy
• 38:35
  Speaker 2: or not, it's his DNA. They're not going to win
• 38:38
  Speaker 2: on this, Tara.
• 38:39
  Speaker 6: No, they're not.
• 38:40
  Speaker 8: And I like to call this the armwavy defense strategy.
• 38:45
  Speaker 8: It's like if I wave my arms hard enough and
• 38:47
  Speaker 8: jump up and down, then maybe everyone will be distracted
• 38:50
  Speaker 8: and think about something else. And it is his DNA
• 38:54
  Speaker 8: at the end of the day, Nancy or exactly right.
• 38:56
  Speaker 8: So they can sit there and, you know, throw all
• 38:59
  Speaker 8: these questions out about this new technology and how was
• 39:04
  Speaker 8: it that they actually got this information. But it doesn't
• 39:07
  Speaker 8: change the outcome. The outcome remains the same, And I
• 39:10
  Speaker 8: think the prosecution's job in this type of scenario is
• 39:14
  Speaker 8: to refocus the jury because the danger is that the
• 39:18
  Speaker 8: jury is going to focus on one of those you know,
• 39:22
  Speaker 8: kind of feed bumps of the defense is thrown out
• 39:25
  Speaker 8: and say, hmm, maybe that does cause me, you know,
• 39:28
  Speaker 8: to think that there's reasonable doubt here. And so even
• 39:32
  Speaker 8: though I think that it's a red herring, I think
• 39:34
  Speaker 8: you're exactly right. I think that you know, the DNA
• 39:37
  Speaker 8: is the DNA. It's his, no one else's, it's his.
• 39:41
  Speaker 8: The the you know, the real risk here is, like
• 39:45
  Speaker 8: was mentioned before, confusing the jury to the point and
• 39:48
  Speaker 8: making them hesitate because the state has a really high burden.
• 39:51
  Speaker 8: It's got to prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt,
• 39:54
  Speaker 8: which is not all doubt. But you know, if the
• 39:57
  Speaker 8: defense can create reasonable doubts, they yeah.
• 40:00
  Speaker 2: And I think that's kind of what happened in the
• 40:02
  Speaker 2: top Mom Casey Anthony case. I think the jury got
• 40:05
  Speaker 2: mired down in the air sample evidence and some of
• 40:09
  Speaker 2: the medical examiner evidence because it was just very confusing
• 40:14
  Speaker 2: when it could have been stated in very simple terms.
• 40:16
  Speaker 2: But I want to remind everyone of a DNA issue
• 40:20
  Speaker 2: in this case. The defense is now claiming that the
• 40:24
  Speaker 2: genetic genealogy info has been hidden from them, but there
• 40:29
  Speaker 2: were two DNA tests in this case. Remember when Coburger
• 40:34
  Speaker 2: was followed to his parents' home for Thanksgiving break and
• 40:39
  Speaker 2: the state waited and cops got abandoned trash and they
• 40:44
  Speaker 2: got a DNA sample from his father and they matched
• 40:48
  Speaker 2: that to the DNA on the knife sheath found under
• 40:51
  Speaker 2: a murder victim, and that DNA showed that the only
• 40:56
  Speaker 2: possible donor of the knife sheath the DNA had to
• 41:02
  Speaker 2: be the biological son of Coburger's father. Coburger's father only
• 41:08
  Speaker 2: has one bio son, and that's Brian Coburger. After they
• 41:12
  Speaker 2: got that match, they went back and did the SDR
• 41:17
  Speaker 2: DNA test. They backtracked and then did genetic genealogy with
• 41:22
  Speaker 2: a family tree, and that is how they came up
• 41:26
  Speaker 2: with the one N five point three seven Octillian match.
• 41:33
  Speaker 2: So there's two DNA matches to Coburger. There's so much
• 41:39
  Speaker 2: else happening in the Coburger case, but we'll save that
• 41:44
  Speaker 2: for another day. Goodbye friend,