A judge in Idaho ruled on Wednesday that crucial evidence against the man accused of murdering four University of Idaho students will remain in the case, affirming that the genetic investigation method used to identify suspects was constitutional. Judge Steven Hippler dismissed arguments from Bryan Kohberger’s defense team, which claimed that law enforcement breached his constitutional rights by utilizing Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG).
This ruling follows a two-day hearing held nearly a month ago and effectively eliminates a significant obstacle for the prosecution ahead of the trial scheduled for August. Kohberger faces four charges of murder connected to the deaths of students Ethan Chapin, Xana Kernodle, Madison Mogen, and Kaylee Goncalves, who were tragically murdered in the early hours of November 13, 2022, at a rental property in Moscow, Idaho. After being asked to enter a plea, Kohberger opted to remain silent, leading the judge to record a not-guilty plea on his behalf. Prosecutors have indicated their intent to pursue the death penalty if he is found guilty.
The IGG method becomes applicable when DNA collected from a crime scene fails to match entries in standard law enforcement databases. In such cases, investigators analyze the DNA for variations known as single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs, and upload this information to genealogy databases like GEDmatch or FamilyTreeDNA to identify potential relatives of the individual whose DNA was discovered.
In Kohberger’s situation, law enforcement reportedly found “touch DNA,” a form of trace DNA, on the knife sheath located at the scene of the stabbings. Utilizing the IGG approach, the FBI linked this DNA to Kohberger as a suspect.
Defense attorney Anne Taylor contended that police did not obtain warrants to analyze the DNA collected from the crime scene, nor did they seek warrants to investigate the DNA of possible relatives stored in genealogy databases. She argued that the IGG identification and any resultant evidence should be dismissed by the court.
However, Judge Hippler noted that to eliminate evidence on grounds of a warrantless search, Kohberger’s defense would need to demonstrate a “legitimate expectation of privacy” regarding the searched item or location.
“Any privacy interest he can claim in this DNA was abandoned along with the sheath, to which he claims no ownership or knowledge,” Hippler remarked. He further explained that even if such abandonment did not occur, Kohberger had not shown it was reasonable to expect a privacy interest in DNA left behind at a crime scene.
Additionally, the judge rejected three further defense motions challenging the manner in which warrants were issued and seeking to suppress evidence, including cell phone data.
