Bryan Kohberger’s defense team challenges the constitutionality of evidence collected through investigative genetic genealogy in the Idaho murders case.
At a Glance
- Kohberger’s defense claims Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG) violates Fourth Amendment rights
- Defense filed 12 suppression motions to exclude nearly all evidence collected by police
- Prosecutors argue IGG methods were legitimate, citing voluntary DNA contributions from relatives
- Partial closure of hearings implemented to prevent bias and ensure a fair trial
- Kohberger faces four charges of first-degree murder for the deaths of University of Idaho students
Constitutional Challenges in the Kohberger Case
The legal team defending Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of murdering four University of Idaho students, has launched a significant challenge against the prosecution’s methods. At the heart of their argument is the use of Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), a technique they claim violates Kohberger’s Fourth Amendment rights. The defense has filed 12 suppression motions, aiming to exclude nearly all evidence collected by law enforcement.
IGG involves building a family tree using DNA from public databases to identify suspects. In this case, it was used on “touch DNA” found on a knife sheath at the crime scene. The defense argues that without IGG, there would be no case against Kohberger, asserting that all subsequent evidence stems from this allegedly unconstitutional method.
Prosecutors maintain that IGG methods were legitimate, emphasizing that Kohberger’s relatives voluntarily provided DNA to a genealogy service. The evidence under scrutiny includes a knife sheath with Kohberger’s DNA and phone records suggesting he stalked the victims’ home. Kohberger, a former Ph.D. criminology student at Washington State University, faces four charges of first-degree murder and felony burglary for the deaths that occurred during a home invasion on November 13, 2022.
“There would be no investigation into him without that original constitutional violation,” attorneys Jay Weston Logsdon and Ann Taylor wrote in a court filing.
They later continued, “Without IGG, there is no case, no request for his phone records, surveillance of his parents’ home, no DNA taken from the garbage out front. Because the IGG analysis is the origin of this matter, everything in the affidavit should be excised.”
The defense also alleges that law enforcement may have lied or omitted information in search warrant applications for Kohberger’s property and DNA. These serious accusations have led to partial closure of hearings to protect the integrity of the jury pool.
Balancing Public Interest and Fair Trial Rights
The case has sparked a debate about transparency in high-profile criminal proceedings. A coalition of news organizations has requested more openness, citing public interest and First Amendment rights. However, Judge Steven Hippler has prioritized protecting the jury pool from potential bias.
“As the State points out, there is no dispute this is a high-profile case, particularly in Idaho. It was transferred to Ada County from Latah County on Defendant’s motion to change venue. Defendant argued in that motion that the small size of the jury and the extensive, inflammatory media coverage prevented him from receiving a fair trial in Latah County. While Ada County has a larger jury pool to pull from than Latah County, the State is concerned that the risk of exposing that jury pool to evidence – particularly evidence that may not be deemed admissible at trial – remains significant,” Judge Steven Hippler said.
This could get very interesting…
