The more the judge hears now on the front end, the less the defendant will have on appeal. One thing this guy won’t be able to say is that he didn’t have a rigorous defense. People have been busting their a**es to help him. Are they working as public defenders or private attorneys?
yes, just like fingerprints, as the judge said, and when you leave your dna, where it really shouldn't be, the the idea pf privacy becomes void, or should do so.
According to the landmark case "California v. Greenwood," the US Supreme Court ruled in 1988 that police can legally search through garbage cans left at the curb for collection.
Its important the defence tries everything they can and do the best job possible . If kohberger is found guilty without a doubt then No one can complain about him no being defended well .
@@visionsofaphrodite bruh she's reaching and this judge is fighting everything 😂 cuz he knows it's pretty crazy how she's like well they didn't have the right to pull trash or this or that... He left his DNA at the scene of the crime. Some how, someway. It was found there. Soo yeah she's reaching. Like she's trying to reach around the whole world for any straws to grasp! How has this gone on this long and still no actual trial! Cuz she's grasping at straws. Straws for her defense and straws to keep this from going to trial. She's grasping at the air cuz there is nothing to grab!
@@nickychasse1588 you haven’t done your homework. there was MORE dna at the crime scene. there was also a clean up. the girls didn’t call until 8 HOURS after the ordeal. bryan’s car was only pinged once in the area. the dog had NO blood. byran had virtually NO contact or connection or motive to kill these victims. I think the only thing that could have pointed him to the crime was either being the car that dropped the perp off, or something to do with drugs. thats my only guess. I do not believe he is the mastermind of this, and the person who did this has connections or relatives in moscow police department. in the year of the snake, some truth will be revealed. also i think it’s highly suspicious that someone tipped bryan as the killer. Allmost lik ethey were the killer themselves?
I understand defending your client but she's going up above and beyond. I believe she dosent approve of the death penalty. She's trying to get rid of the DNA for it don't lie. She's also trying to make sure he gets an appeal.
Police is dirty too. They only want a confession and close the case and sometimes did all the dirtiest tricks in the book to get it from the accused. But if you want to defend an accused you know he is guilty, you would have no choice but fight the technicality of the police. I think if you don’t have a strong case, you should advise your client to take a plea or let other lawyers take it.
@judystringham6688. Actually she's thinking long term about people's privacy. Kohberger deserves to be found guilty, but she's right that if the judge decides to let this random DNA be used secretly by law enforcement to identify suspects, that will have far reaching implications beyond this case and will affect a lot of people in the future
@@ardalire651it’s already been used in solving hundreds of cold cases & Kohbergers is one of the few active investigations it was used in. It’s phenomenal.
Judge understands she has to make objections to preserve the record. She is providing arguments for his multiple appeals as he sits in prison for life.
@@Ribbs88She’s making an argument but her basis for doing so is on a very weak legal foundation. The judge kindly showed her exactly how weak her thought process and arguments were by questioning her thought process and interpretation of the cases.
Courts have long ruled that when anyone places an item in the trash they have relinquished title and have further legal interest in the item. She is trying to bluff her way through this.
She's just doing her job, but this judge is not having her weak arguements. I loved when he said we'll when you leave you're DNA at a crime scene, you give up your right to privacy. Maybe you shouldn't have left your your DNA at the crime scene, Mr. Kohberger!.
Why do people constantly say 'shame on so & so', for simply doing their job properly? We aren't China. Everyone gets a defense. She's defending legal aspects.
Ms Taylor, Thank you for asking for this trial to be moved to another county! You are getting exactly what you ask for! LOVE this judge!! Careful what you ask for, you might just get it! ❤
If I’m understanding her correctly, that’s not her argument. Her argument is that they linked what was at the crime scene - the blood on the sheath - to the defendant by accessing databases tied to a private genealogy research company, where the hit was on someone in his family, not him directly. Where this goes out the window is when you consider that most of those services specify in their contracts that they may cooperate with law enforcement - meaning, even though their database is *not* owned and operated by law enforcement, it does not necessarily require a warrant to make an inquiry or provide information *to* law enforcement - and that it did not flag Brian himself, merely someone in his family, which narrowed the net and led to later evidence collection, which is fairly aboveboard. Where it further goes out the window is her assertion that everything they have on him comes from a tainted vine, since it’s all tied back to the DNA… but she’s either forgetting or willfully ignoring witness statements, reports of his car in the area, or his behavior during his traffic stops and eventual arrest (which would have led to them pulling his DNA if they wanted to, anyway, making it sort of a moot point.) She keeps claiming they had no right to access the databases involved, but I’d like to see the user contracts for whatever site they got the information from. Of course, she can’t even name the site, so… 🤷🏻♂️ Again, with the services I’ve used, it’s pretty clear that turning over your DNA means it may end up in the hands of the law at some point, and it’s not unheard of to use familial matching to narrow down a suspect pool either through elimination or spotlighting, so a lot of her arguments - especially the way she words it with phrases like “super secret” - end up sounding like “I want this evidence suppressed because it’s devastating to my case” rather than “it’s unlawful and/or irrelevant.”
@ they've done it numerous times and other cases and they haven't had a problem. Superior court's not gonna have a problem with it you can tell by the judge s demeanor
@@kaineandrews3790 "If I’m understanding her correctly, that’s not her argument. " Looks like over 90% of comments here don't even understand her argument.
@@kaineandrews3790 " I’d like to see the user contracts for whatever site they got the information from" Adhesion contracts are not necessarily valid in all of their provisions. --- "their database is not owned and operated by law enforcement" But third party retention of data is still embued with privacy interests from the source. This "third party" doctrine is not a well established or well reasoned (juducally speaking) area of law as yet so it makes many people believe that it is a bogus argument. But it's not bogus, it's just a matter of what society has thus far clearly recognized impacts their privacy. As use of AI increases, I think we will see a faster change as to what people are willing to accept as not having their privacy interent impacted. If the population at large knew all the things that their DNA can tell others about their personal life, I think this issue would resolve in favor of protection of DNA and rather quickly. I am not saying people can always prevent law enforcement for delving into the private stuff, just that it would require a warrant (as she has argued).
If Anne was tripping over her words apparently you missed jennings slurring her script and ended up being quite an asset to the defense's case for Frank's. He tried to walk her through what not to say but she couldn't pick up what he was laying down. She basically made it where it will be hard to not grant one.
You do realize you want the defense to put on the best case so if this dude is guilty, he doesn’t get off later on appeal, right? It’s not a win for the prosecution or anyone else for the defense to fail at representing the accused. We want the best of the best on both sides for a reason. If the state has a strong case, they’ll get the conviction.
She has no leg to stand on. It’s pretty simple and the judge makes it clear. They used his DNA- DNA left at the crime scene- in a search utilizing a DNA Ancestry joint to see connections. She has nothing and goes around in circles trying to suggest they can’t do that. It’s absurd.
It was tested twice by the state with 0 result. Only the secret method yielded a result from a partial match using a fill in the blanks method. The court deserves to know what that process is.
@@mikejohnson9960you are stating misinformation. That is absolutely not what happened. You clearly do not understand the process or the series of steps here.
Shes arguing that the DNA was matched by a warrantless search of a privately owned genealogy database (process called IGG). All subsequent evidence was obtained because of that information, thus would be the fruit of a poisonous tree. They need a warrant for cell phone records, but now there's precedent that the government can search private DNA databases without a warrant. Its not a crazy argument, although this guy is for sure guilty.
its not entirely bogus. she just didn't frame her argument correctly. let's say there was no knife sheath but instead it was a tv remote. there could be tons of innocent people who left DNA on that TV remote. her argument is basically a person who is presumed innocent has the expectation that their DNA is private and the court needs a warrant to search it. in the case of a TV remote maybe the court says "no we won't grant a warrant because there isn't enough to suggest that any DNA found on the remote would be that of the murderer and infringing the privacy of this anonymous person who is presumed innocent is not justified". maybe in the case of a knife sheath the court says "we will grant the warrant because there is a strong likelihood that whoever left there DNA on the knife sheath is the murderer and so we can justify infringing their privacy"
@@Luckynina597 No warrant is needed to process DNA from evidence at the scene. If there is no match in the legal or public databases, then a warrant is needed to obtain DNA from the suspect.
Defense attorney telling the judge his question is "a loaded question" she is insane to say such. It was a lawful search and no violation of her clients rights
Just the fact that the judge sits quietly while she rattles on is exactly the way to deal with this attorney. She’s sounding sillier the more she speaks.
After the CBI case, I'm halfway agreeing with her. Look at the 102 felonies she is facing. Yes, I want whoever did this to go to prison and get prison "justice". But, DNA fkery has happened many times.
@ facts. People hear “DNA” and think it’s the magic way of solving cases. If they realized how sketchy the technology was, they wouldn’t want it being used against them or their loved ones either.
@@The.ARCHIT3CT but they love it when it exonerates someone wrongfully accused. DNA has solved more crimes and gotten more wrongfully accused out of jail than it has made mistakes . give me a break. you are so wrong
@ there’s been over 200 cases of people being exonerated because of FAULTY DNA or misrepresentation of those facts. How many need to be wrongfully convicted before we take a look at the this entire system? DNA was introduced as court-admissible evidence in the early 90’s, and in 3 decades there’s literally been HUNDREDS of wrongful convictions. ONE wrongful conviction is too many, let alone hundreds. Some people fail to use logic.
His attorney's tone is so condescending. She talks to the judge like he's a child, even though she's not even making much sense. When he answers, he eviscerates her with just a few words.
"Eviscerates" makes it sounds like the judge is being vindictive. He is simply asking for specifics and she can't give any. This is the way to deal with an arrogant bully. I agree she doesn't help herself with a condescending and almost confrontational tone! Her constant deflections need to be shut down. She's beginning to sound like a conspiracy nut.
@@zanetaantkiewicz9944 That will be his defense. He was framed by the real killer. They were college buddies each trying to out wit the other. The Perry Mason moment will come when Brian takes the stand and his old roomie is uncovered. hahahaha
@@zanetaantkiewicz9944bro please tell me you arent trying to defend this lol, this case is sealed and shut cut and dry, he went back to the scene because he left it lol, theres blood on it, it wasent there beforehand, the knife used to kill everyone matches perfectly to the size of the shith. Like bro you gonna need a stronger argument then “how do you know it was apart of the murder weapon” you sound like his attorney right now lol
Like the unknown blood DNA of which was found on the stairway that was never tested and traced by law enforcement… or maybe the witness that doesn’t know if she saw, heard anything or if she was just dreaming because she was so drunk. Let’s also not entertain that NO DNA was found on that sheath when tested until the FBI tested it. Let’s entertain this complete nonsense but not someone’s right to privacy or the secrecy surrounding that privacy! People only hear what they want to hear.
@@daniellegreen2135 dude, his own sister expressed worry to her parents that she thought he may be involved grow up. His own parents haven’t even gone to visit him. Trust me. I’m a mom. I don’t care how broke I am if my son’s in jail facing possible murder charges I sell things I own, including jewelry to try and pay for an airplane ticket to go visit him the fact that they haven’t gone to visit him speaks volumes.
@ Where did you get that information from? Can you point me to the court document because I must have missed it or maybe an interview where she specifically says that? I’m not interested in the media rumours who have made up so much in this case. I’m looking for facts. I’m a mom also.
Was it a DNA sample taken at the scene of a heinous crime to determine a suspect? Was it the glove found by a member of the public , missed by the investigators?
Bryan is innocent lisa get a clue and use some common sense if you even have any. He literally tore the prosecution up today in the franks hearing and he even knows they lied
The rule of something left behind ....how could any crime be investigated if the law can use what the criminal leaves behind to identify 🤔 a lawyer that supports a criminal to this level is used to weak judges
not entirely. she just didn't frame her argument correctly. let's say there was no knife sheath but instead it was a tv remote. there could be tons of innocent people who left DNA on that TV remote. her argument is basically a person who is presumed innocent has the expectation that their DNA is private and the court needs a warrant to search it. in the case of a TV remote maybe the court says "no we won't grant a warrant because there isn't enough to suggest that any DNA found on the remote would be that of the murderer and infringing the privacy of this anonymous person who is presumed innocent is not justified". maybe in the case of a knife sheath the court says "we will grant the warrant because there is a strong likelihood that whoever left there DNA on the knife sheath is the murderer and so we can justify infringing their privacy"
Since when is necessary a warrant for searching the trash? I know that once one put something in the trash in the street is public property, no warrant necessary.
I am not arguing this point at all.... one thing that people do NOT think about is WHERE they place their trash for pickup! On THEIR property or on public property. MOST people Never think of that !
I live in Florida and 15ft from the road is an easement for the state to do repairs. Water lines, electric lines, sewage lines etc. They don't have to get your permission to tear up your front yard but fix it b4 they leave..
Hah, did u watch the whole day? L&C isn't showing the rest where the Prosecution lies were exposed one after another. How about the unknown male BLOOD dna found on the stair handrail that the MPD never identified? Or the fact DM's statements didn't match the crime scene?🤔
This Defense Attorney has terrible deportment. She is rude and aggressive toward the Judge, and casting aspersions about him being biased toward the Prosecution. I cannot imagine how she will behave toward witnesses and the effect that her behaviour will have on the Jury.
She’s actually pretty amazing at her job. I can only think your comment is based on sexism, that you think she is aggressive because she is a woman and she’s supposed to be sweet or something. She is doing the best job she can to defend her client.
They claim they do not release it willingly, but will fully comply with legal demands for the information Once you submit your dna you are subject to searches if the law requires it
Even if there was a provision in the signed something (CONTRACT) that made it clear it would be public, it could still be invalidated because of being an adhesion contract.
Those companies are a front for the intelligence agencies to grab up as much dna as possibly. Go look at 23 & Me's stock price once people found out they were illegally using it to prosecute crimes. It dropped from $320 a share to under $4 bucks.
And if the DNA matches a person, they are contacted before the information is given to LE. For example “Ma’am, it appears that your DNA profile is matching the DNA from a crime scene and LE would like to use your information. Do you allow us to proceed with this?”
Theres NO violation of rights here. You can NOT get a warrant if you dont know WHO you are serving the warrant on in the first place when collecting evidence.
You miss the point. This is not talking about the initial search of the knife sheath which found BK DNA on it. This is about later search of that BK DNA to create a "snippet" that could be used for later searches looking for other people with shared DNA.
@@2Truth4Libertyand that DNA was obtained lawfully. She went back and argued about crime scene DNA and testing outside of codis, and said a search warrant should've been obtained, when in fact the DNA was lawfully obtained, and no warrant needed for testing. Your right to privacy does not protect you from DNA left outside your body. Her argument would be excluding any DNA testing from all cases because DNA is "private".
The entire defense seems to be hinged on getting BK off on a technicality. There is no innocent reason for BK's DNA to be found next to one of the victims.
EVERY person who isn't convicted gets off on a "technicality". You're a dip$hit who just listens to and repeats unproven nonsense. In a trial...the defense tries to show that the prosecution is wrong and conducted themselves outside of the law. EVERY F'N TIME🙄
She is talking about using gene9logy websites . Alot of us put our dna on these sites. Law enforcement shouldn't never without a warrant get that information
She is desperately trying to find some way to get this excluded. I appreciate the incredibly difficult position she's in but it's painful to watch her make the argument.
She is beyond ridiculous. He is guilty and will be found guilty. Her trying to literally suppress all evidence in this case is just showing his guilt more and more. Also the way he looks w just eyes is so disturbing and extremely creepy!
@Jennifer-oi8ni Unfortunately, the FBI and Moscow police were not forthright in this case. The FBI did not want to reveal there work, and the same with Moscow police. Somehow Brian Kohlberger's DNA was transferred from one person to the perpetrator who went to a crime scene.
You obviously didn't watch the whole trial today. So many lies from the State were exposed. How come they found bl00d dna on the stair handrail from a man they never identified?
Maybe watch the entire hearing before coming to an uneducated conclusion. By the end of this hearing all eyes and ears fall back on the prosecution to provide evidence that Bryan committed these crimes. Which they can't, and the judge eats the prosecution alive. You guys need to learn how to read a room 😂
Go watch the whole day. She destroys all kinds of holes in the State's case, yet curiously the Media keeps that hidden from the public - I wonder why? Do u remember when the "experts" told us c0vid was from Bat Soup? Did u believe them?
@@michaelscott3222 100% Huge discovery facts leaked in this hearing. The fact another man's bl00d was found on the stair handrail which was never identified should be front page news across America. Media suppression in full swing.
Why did they obtain a warrant for kg labtop in custody at the cour de laine forensic lab? They also got one to search bk phone contents- after he was in custody- so yes they need warrants to move Evidence found in a crime scene!
That is not the issue! Uhhg. The police lied about the evidence they had to get the search warrant! They did not use the DNA as a reason to get the warrant!
@colleen0229 so if it was found at an active crime scene investigation...they to need a warrant to investigate what they are investigating. You hear how crazy you sound? This has to be a bot account
@@janeferguson4455 No it doesn't. Once you put your trash "out for collection" it's considered "abandoned" and you no longer have a "right to privacy". It has nothing to do with public/private property.
Did u watch the whole day or just this little clipped part? Did u see how she exposed another man's bl00d was found on the stair handrail in the house and was never identified? Also a bl00dy glove outside with another man never identified? How about how the roommate said she wasn't sure what she could remember because she was so drunk and even recanted her testimony? Etc. Go watch. Huge evidence holes.
So what. It wasn't his DNA or we would have seen that a long time ago, it's a f***[ng sham. Judge has already predetermined by his higher ups, or whoever he listens to, not even a competent judge,disgusting individual, no work, no lab protocols, judge is covering for state. He is pathetic!!!
There’s been a few criminals caught this way and honestly I see no issue here. But of course all the “he’s innocent” people will argue all day long that it’s wrong.. I call BS!
If the suspect would have stayed at the crime scene to tell the police “you can’t search my DNA without my permission,” I guess she would have an argument. Right???
It was a violation of the victim’s rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, when they were viciously murdered! They never invited him into their house to murder them; and he’s the one who left DNA!
assuming someone left it there is mind blowing to me... especially on a moveable objectand no other DNA is to be found anywhere else in that house??? Use your brain... it'll help you
@ How am I wrong??? Only touch DNA on a moveable object and no DNA anywhere else.. that's nothing. There was blood on the stair railing and that didn't get tested.. hm.. interesting. You have no idea what they did in this investigation.. its laughable and I feel sorry for you and others that don't see it
There is no justice if you charge the wrong guy... and these are your rights being trampled on not just BKs! Your own touch DNA is everywhere. In places you never have even been. When you touch a door handle or product at the grocery store and put it back on the shelf. Money or the handle at the gas pump, you transfer your DNA. The murderer is the guy who left the unknown male blood evidence on the stair banister! He is still out there!
Finally a judge confronting Taylor with common sense. She has been playing the longest stall tactic/double talk aka tax payer paid big bag of money. It’s disgraceful. If she truly thought her client were innocent she would want to have him released asap and have explanations of his whereabouts that night. Love this judge, Justice for the victims/families.. Let’s go!
Exactly, Michele. And as for runner, no, what's she's getting at, is many people have actually been set up for all different crimes before, and she's questioning all of it. She said GPS shows he was not at that address, during those times they believe this happened.
She lost the argument when she had zero case law to support her claim. Shes used to the prior Judge who let her run the courtroom. This judge runs his own CR apparently😁
There are many law professors that believe that DNA shouldn't be used to convict the perpetrators. They believe that DNA is too invasive a tool for the legal system to use and it shouldn't be allowed in court... similar to a lie detector test cannot be admitted in a court of trial. So, this is what Taylor is trying to do... set precedence to have it thrown out and not used. She KNOWS that this is the only thing that is connecting BK to the Idaho 4.
@@jgray690 If she dismisses the case then Brian Albert is the primary suspect. Her ‘relations’ will do everything to nail Karen for a crime she didn’t commit. Now Bev is going down with the ship. The sallyport video proves evidence tampering. She can’t escape that
You don’t get privacy if your blood is left at a murder scene. Needing a warrant to match it in a database would be ridiculous. Can she explain why the FBI wasn’t allowed to search other databases? Which databases? What secrets were there? There is case law backing up forensic genealogy. I’ll never get this time back.
@@colleen0229right a car that's unidentifiable that there's also 50k of in the surrounding area. Cell phone data places him away from the scene and the only surviving 'witness' waits 8hrs to alert cops even tho she snap chats all the friend group who arrive to the house before the cops. It was a drug house and everyone knew it.
After a few searches, was it even seen or found! Does seem odd that it wasn't found the first few searches. Let's watch the body cams from every search, including the one that found the evidence!
Ridiculous. Get this trial moving and give these kids the justice they deserve.
The more the judge hears now on the front end, the less the defendant will have on appeal. One thing this guy won’t be able to say is that he didn’t have a rigorous defense. People have been busting their a**es to help him. Are they working as public defenders or private attorneys?
Amen! She’s just spouting a bunch of malarkey!!
When you leave your DNA at a murder scene, there is no privacy.
Yup. Don't leave your DNA at the murder scene and you won't have this problem
Lmao
yes, just like fingerprints, as the judge said, and when you leave your dna, where it really shouldn't be, the the idea pf privacy becomes void, or should do so.
Not to mention privacy of vic tims...
She actually argued he had to knowingly abandon his DNA at the scene. 😅
When you throw garbage into a trash can, it becomes public domain. She is grasping at straws.
According to the landmark case "California v. Greenwood," the US Supreme Court ruled in 1988 that police can legally search through garbage cans left at the curb for collection.
I bet she is regretting that change of venue now! This judge isn’t playing!
Nope,Judge Judge let her get away with nonsense but not this one. It certainly was not an illegal search, none of them
You clearly didn't watch the entire hearing. The prosecution got eaten alive by this judge, Bryan will definitely be exonerated 😂😆
it’s just different by vibes - he’s a judge. they don’t usually “play”, what do you mean
Its important the defence tries everything they can and do the best job possible .
If kohberger is found guilty without a doubt then No one can complain about him no being defended well .
💯
A warrant for what?? His DNA at the crime scene?? Trash?? This is so embarrassing!
His lawyer is just embarrassing herself going round in circles lol
Yes. It’s totally embarrassing. They should be ashamed by themselves for having such arguments like that.
They know it's their only chance.
you weren't listening..search warrants for the 2 additional genealogy sites.
“Embarrassing “ is the exact word.
The attorney is really reaching here. AND, she is the one who requested the change of venue that got her this judge. I love it.
ANN TAYLOR IS NOT REACHING.
YOU HAVE NOT DONE YOUR RESEARCH AND IT SHOWS
@@visionsofaphrodite bruh she's reaching and this judge is fighting everything 😂 cuz he knows it's pretty crazy how she's like well they didn't have the right to pull trash or this or that... He left his DNA at the scene of the crime. Some how, someway. It was found there. Soo yeah she's reaching. Like she's trying to reach around the whole world for any straws to grasp! How has this gone on this long and still no actual trial! Cuz she's grasping at straws. Straws for her defense and straws to keep this from going to trial. She's grasping at the air cuz there is nothing to grab!
@@nickychasse1588 you haven’t done your homework. there was MORE dna at the crime scene. there was also a clean up. the girls didn’t call until 8 HOURS after the ordeal. bryan’s car was only pinged once in the area. the dog had NO blood. byran had virtually NO contact or connection or motive to kill these victims. I think the only thing that could have pointed him to the crime was either being the car that dropped the perp off, or something to do with drugs. thats my only guess. I do not believe he is the mastermind of this, and the person who did this has connections or relatives in moscow police department. in the year of the snake, some truth will be revealed. also i think it’s highly suspicious that someone tipped bryan as the killer. Allmost lik ethey were the killer themselves?
I think the best way not to leave dna at a crime scene is to…. Not do the crime. 😂😂😂
This ^^^😂
And the other bl*od samples?
Indeed
Tell that to corrupt cops who plant evidence
😂
She's not getting her way with this Judge.
LOVE this judge. He is paying attention and shutting her down. She is weak and is getting destroyed
I hope so.
Then I wouldn't put a Bet on it if I were YOU.
The judge’s hypotheticals & truth make total sense I enjoyed listening to them talking about the dna identification.
@ well, I AM putting a bet on justice being served and this judge is paying attention
She’s grasping at straws at this point and it’s extremely annoying. I know it’s her job to protect that murderer, but it doesn’t fly.
I understand defending your client but she's going up above and beyond. I believe she dosent approve of the death penalty. She's trying to get rid of the DNA for it don't lie. She's also trying to make sure he gets an appeal.
Police is dirty too. They only want a confession and close the case and sometimes did all the dirtiest tricks in the book to get it from the accused. But if you want to defend an accused you know he is guilty, you would have no choice but fight the technicality of the police. I think if you don’t have a strong case, you should advise your client to take a plea or let other lawyers take it.
@judystringham6688. Actually she's thinking long term about people's privacy. Kohberger deserves to be found guilty, but she's right that if the judge decides to let this random DNA be used secretly by law enforcement to identify suspects, that will have far reaching implications beyond this case and will affect a lot of people in the future
@@ardalire651 don,t commit crime and leave DNA and you ain.t got to worry ok love
@@ardalire651it’s already been used in solving hundreds of cold cases & Kohbergers is one of the few active investigations it was used in. It’s phenomenal.
He didn’t slam her, they engaged in professional discourse over the arguments, which is a crucial aspect of justice.
There is nothing is justice that says you have to be polite.
Truth.
@@smushie75but professional curtesy does.
The judge finds difficulty to suppress an evidence that implicates her client to the murders of four innocent victims
actually, the judge was pretty kind considering the level of ignorance he had to deal with.
How could they violate his privacy if they didn’t know who he was.
Exactly… she’s been looking at herself in mirror for photo ops 🙄
Bingo! Ann, hello? This one didn’t stick either! What ya got next?
That’s exactly what I thought.
Case law: jane vs John Doe 😅
Anyone, can be falsely, accused, anytime.
I can't even believe that she is arguing this. What a joke!
This judge is awake, unlike the other judge. He is on point
Lol
@@carolyndee4565 This is the judge that we needed for this case.
I totally agree with you. This judge isn't afraid to open up instead of sitting there with a grin on his face as the other judge.
The judge did not “slam” the defense. As always, he was polite and to the point.
They have to make it sound more interesting to get more views.
I mean he’s not catering to her that’s for sure. He’s polite but telling her how it is
She's asking for basic things and prosecution is not giving it to her...
Judge understands she has to make objections to preserve the record. She is providing arguments for his multiple appeals as he sits in prison for life.
@@Ribbs88She’s making an argument but her basis for doing so is on a very weak legal foundation. The judge kindly showed her exactly how weak her thought process and arguments were by questioning her thought process and interpretation of the cases.
Trash pull ??? I don’t believe you need a warrant to pull trash for DNA
Agreed, there is no privacy in trash.
Correct its anyone's once it's in the trash ..
They lived in a private property gated community.
Courts have long ruled that when anyone places an item in the trash they have relinquished title and have further legal interest in the item. She is trying to bluff her way through this.
This was the funniest hearing by far i love when the judge said if u dontcwant to leave ur dna dont go to the crime scene 😆😆😆😆😆😆
It’s time that these families get justice for their children’s murders.
@@theavanrensburg8196 The MPD should probably go arrest the actual kllers then.
agreed. Everything points to this guy being guilty, there's no need to let justice wait for too much longer.
@@Lionman383 wrong this might not even go to trial
@ epic lol
Right !
That's the worst 4th amendment argument I've ever heard 🙄
@@farmerchick3040 That's NO DOUBT the VERY FIRST 4th Amendment Argument You've heard, so Name another 4th Amendment Argument You've heard...
But, but, secret things I don't understand were happening! 😂
Absolutely great judge. Finally, a judge who knows the law. Thank you
Lol.
I bet she's sorry the case moved
So the FBI is allowed to say "it was him but don't ask how we know it"? are you out of your mind?
Exactly
She's just doing her job, but this judge is not having her weak arguements. I loved when he said we'll when you leave you're DNA at a crime scene, you give up your right to privacy. Maybe you shouldn't have left your your DNA at the crime scene, Mr. Kohberger!.
The knife sheath wasn’t seized from his person /property, so… how exactly were his privacy rights violated?
Hi
Have you even seen a knife sheath? A drop of blood? A wound? A body?
The fact that they ran it twice and got. Nothing till fbi got a snip of match
@@R3M3519that is not a fact. They ran two tests SNP and STR. One for CODIS one for IGG.
Exactly !!!!! THANK you!
Oh, she is so annoying. She is asking that DNA should no longer be allowed in court to solve crimes. Shame on her
It's her job
She is doing her best for her client. And she's making a big name for herself. Just what every lawyer wants.
How were they supposed to find in a suspect? If someone is suspected of killing four people, if he leaves something behind, tough luck,
@@ilomars281 it’s much more complicated than you make it out to be. You should watch j.embree
Why do people constantly say 'shame on so & so', for simply doing their job properly? We aren't China. Everyone gets a defense. She's defending legal aspects.
Ms Taylor, Thank you for asking for this trial to be moved to another county! You are getting exactly what you ask for! LOVE this judge!! Careful what you ask for, you might just get it! ❤
💯
Amen!!
Me to this judge is great
I sincerely hope one of your kids don't end up there. They don't have to be guilty remember.
@@jacobiewhat?
How can there be any expectation of privacy in leaving your DNA in a horrific crime scene?
Preposterous
If I’m understanding her correctly, that’s not her argument. Her argument is that they linked what was at the crime scene - the blood on the sheath - to the defendant by accessing databases tied to a private genealogy research company, where the hit was on someone in his family, not him directly.
Where this goes out the window is when you consider that most of those services specify in their contracts that they may cooperate with law enforcement - meaning, even though their database is *not* owned and operated by law enforcement, it does not necessarily require a warrant to make an inquiry or provide information *to* law enforcement - and that it did not flag Brian himself, merely someone in his family, which narrowed the net and led to later evidence collection, which is fairly aboveboard.
Where it further goes out the window is her assertion that everything they have on him comes from a tainted vine, since it’s all tied back to the DNA… but she’s either forgetting or willfully ignoring witness statements, reports of his car in the area, or his behavior during his traffic stops and eventual arrest (which would have led to them pulling his DNA if they wanted to, anyway, making it sort of a moot point.)
She keeps claiming they had no right to access the databases involved, but I’d like to see the user contracts for whatever site they got the information from. Of course, she can’t even name the site, so… 🤷🏻♂️ Again, with the services I’ve used, it’s pretty clear that turning over your DNA means it may end up in the hands of the law at some point, and it’s not unheard of to use familial matching to narrow down a suspect pool either through elimination or spotlighting, so a lot of her arguments - especially the way she words it with phrases like “super secret” - end up sounding like “I want this evidence suppressed because it’s devastating to my case” rather than “it’s unlawful and/or irrelevant.”
@ they've done it numerous times and other cases and they haven't had a problem.
Superior court's not gonna have a problem with it you can tell by the judge s demeanor
@@kaineandrews3790
"If I’m understanding her correctly, that’s not her argument. "
Looks like over 90% of comments here don't even understand her argument.
@@kaineandrews3790
" I’d like to see the user contracts for whatever site they got the information from"
Adhesion contracts are not necessarily valid in all of their provisions.
---
"their database is not owned and operated by law enforcement"
But third party retention of data is still embued with privacy interests from the source.
This "third party" doctrine is not a well established or well reasoned (juducally speaking) area of law as yet so it makes many people believe that it is a bogus argument. But it's not bogus, it's just a matter of what society has thus far clearly recognized impacts their privacy. As use of AI increases, I think we will see a faster change as to what people are willing to accept as not having their privacy interent impacted.
If the population at large knew all the things that their DNA can tell others about their personal life, I think this issue would resolve in favor of protection of DNA and rather quickly.
I am not saying people can always prevent law enforcement for delving into the private stuff, just that it would require a warrant (as she has argued).
@@kaineandrews3790
Lol
If Kohberger's DNA was there, then Kohberger was there. Period.
When? Can't prove that particular night. Just saying.
@annikajohansson9171 if his dna is on the sheath of the murder weapon it's obvious WHEN he was there 😏
Touch DNA is unreliable. Millions of peoples touch DNA is all over the world.
@@annikajohansson9171huh?!?!?!
@ Canʻt prove the particular knife sheath? There was only one at the scene.
“I object your honor!”
“Why?”
“Because it’s devastating to my case!”
Liar Liar 😂
Yep, it's certainly damningly harmful to their case. Pay some ppl anything they will sell their own grandmother swampland in the artic. Disgusting
That's funny. That movie was a staple in my childhood.
I strenuously object!🤣🤣🤣
"Your Honor, would the court be willing to grant me a short bathroom break?"
Watching Ann trip over her words is so satisfying. She is so use to getting her way she wasn’t prepared for this new judge.
Really…then you didn’t list n to the State and how embarrassing that was even the judge couldn’t listen to her anymore!
Are you listening?!? The defense actually showed the holes in this case...and there is NO actually proof of his involvement.
If Anne was tripping over her words apparently you missed jennings slurring her script and ended up being quite an asset to the defense's case for Frank's. He tried to walk her through what not to say but she couldn't pick up what he was laying down. She basically made it where it will be hard to not grant one.
It’s great
You do realize you want the defense to put on the best case so if this dude is guilty, he doesn’t get off later on appeal, right? It’s not a win for the prosecution or anyone else for the defense to fail at representing the accused. We want the best of the best on both sides for a reason. If the state has a strong case, they’ll get the conviction.
She has no leg to stand on. It’s pretty simple and the judge makes it clear. They used his DNA- DNA left at the crime scene- in a search utilizing a DNA Ancestry joint to see connections. She has nothing and goes around in circles trying to suggest they can’t do that. It’s absurd.
It was tested twice by the state with 0 result. Only the secret method yielded a result from a partial match using a fill in the blanks method. The court deserves to know what that process is.
@@mikejohnson9960 ABSOLUTELY 100%
@@mikejohnson9960that’s not what she was objecting to though, or certainly didn’t make it clear! It was as clear as mud
@@mikejohnson9960you are stating misinformation. That is absolutely not what happened. You clearly do not understand the process or the series of steps here.
It's so cringe watching her basically trying to turn poop into gold, and the judge was so patient in hearing her bogus arguments
She can do all these things , that way when the evidence proves that he did do this , the appeals will be harder to get !
Shes arguing that the DNA was matched by a warrantless search of a privately owned genealogy database (process called IGG). All subsequent evidence was obtained because of that information, thus would be the fruit of a poisonous tree. They need a warrant for cell phone records, but now there's precedent that the government can search private DNA databases without a warrant. Its not a crazy argument, although this guy is for sure guilty.
its not entirely bogus. she just didn't frame her argument correctly. let's say there was no knife sheath but instead it was a tv remote. there could be tons of innocent people who left DNA on that TV remote. her argument is basically a person who is presumed innocent has the expectation that their DNA is private and the court needs a warrant to search it. in the case of a TV remote maybe the court says "no we won't grant a warrant because there isn't enough to suggest that any DNA found on the remote would be that of the murderer and infringing the privacy of this anonymous person who is presumed innocent is not justified". maybe in the case of a knife sheath the court says "we will grant the warrant because there is a strong likelihood that whoever left there DNA on the knife sheath is the murderer and so we can justify infringing their privacy"
@@Luckynina597
No warrant is needed to process DNA from evidence at the scene.
If there is no match in the legal or public databases, then a warrant is needed to obtain DNA from the suspect.
@@Just.anordinaryperson Absolutely correct 😊
Defense attorney telling the judge his question is "a loaded question" she is insane to say such. It was a lawful search and no violation of her clients rights
Where does she get ro make policelaws and he was never invited to their place
The way the judge looks at her says it all😂
Just the fact that the judge sits quietly while she rattles on is exactly the way to deal with this attorney. She’s sounding sillier the more she speaks.
Taylor thinks she is smarter than everyone in the room. Yet she ends up sounding absolutely ridiculous.
@@sevenitta-_-🤡
Yes, she is NOT articulate! "Super secret".....what is she, 12 years old?!? SMH
@@gretchenkiley6615gretchrn u sound 12 years old she is up against the whole state FBI etc.. i find her points valid. Dont be a 🐑
True that she sounds sillier as she goes. Just keep in mind that these are billable hours that she’s “working” through.
She’s one argument away from saying that DNA evidence should not be admitted in any court proceedings.
Transfer DNA*
After the CBI case, I'm halfway agreeing with her. Look at the 102 felonies she is facing. Yes, I want whoever did this to go to prison and get prison "justice". But, DNA fkery has happened many times.
@ facts. People hear “DNA” and think it’s the magic way of solving cases. If they realized how sketchy the technology was, they wouldn’t want it being used against them or their loved ones either.
@@The.ARCHIT3CT but they love it when it exonerates someone wrongfully accused. DNA has solved more crimes and gotten more wrongfully accused out of jail than it has made mistakes . give me a break. you are so wrong
@ there’s been over 200 cases of people being exonerated because of FAULTY DNA or misrepresentation of those facts. How many need to be wrongfully convicted before we take a look at the this entire system? DNA was introduced as court-admissible evidence in the early 90’s, and in 3 decades there’s literally been HUNDREDS of wrongful convictions. ONE wrongful conviction is too many, let alone hundreds. Some people fail to use logic.
She obviously has to come up with a defense, but she seems to be saying they need his consent to evaluate evidence. Uh, no
not evaluate, search
His attorney's tone is so condescending. She talks to the judge like he's a child, even though she's not even making much sense. When he answers, he eviscerates her with just a few words.
She’s just talking in circles making everyone dizzy
Just nonsense and grasping at everything
She doubled her fee to take this case which makes me so angry. She then demanded people to work with her. His defence will end up costing millions.
It's like she believes she is higher level educated than the Judge
"Eviscerates" makes it sounds like the judge is being vindictive. He is simply asking for specifics and she can't give any. This is the way to deal with an arrogant bully. I agree she doesn't help herself with a condescending and almost confrontational tone! Her constant deflections need to be shut down. She's beginning to sound like a conspiracy nut.
Your honor he left his DNA on a piece of the murder weapon underneath a murdered person, but he has an expectation of privacy! 🤦
How do you know the sheath belonged to the murder weapon?
@@zanetaantkiewicz9944 That will be his defense. He was framed by the real killer. They were college buddies each trying to out wit the other. The Perry Mason moment will come when Brian takes the stand and his old roomie is uncovered. hahahaha
@@zanetaantkiewicz9944bro please tell me you arent trying to defend this lol, this case is sealed and shut cut and dry, he went back to the scene because he left it lol, theres blood on it, it wasent there beforehand, the knife used to kill everyone matches perfectly to the size of the shith. Like bro you gonna need a stronger argument then “how do you know it was apart of the murder weapon” you sound like his attorney right now lol
@@zanetaantkiewicz9944common sense!!
@@zanetaantkiewicz9944 I’m sure the deceased people always slept with knife sheaths.
"Well, don't go to crime scenes." 😂😂
She wanted the trial moved now she’s dealing with a superior and supremely confident judge that DOESNT bend the law or entertain nonsense .
Facts 💯
Like the unknown blood DNA of which was found on the stairway that was never tested and traced by law enforcement… or maybe the witness that doesn’t know if she saw, heard anything or if she was just dreaming because she was so drunk. Let’s also not entertain that NO DNA was found on that sheath when tested until the FBI tested it. Let’s entertain this complete nonsense but not someone’s right to privacy or the secrecy surrounding that privacy! People only hear what they want to hear.
@@daniellegreen2135 dude, his own sister expressed worry to her parents that she thought he may be involved grow up. His own parents haven’t even gone to visit him. Trust me. I’m a mom. I don’t care how broke I am if my son’s in jail facing possible murder charges I sell things I own, including jewelry to try and pay for an airplane ticket to go visit him the fact that they haven’t gone to visit him speaks volumes.
@ Where did you get that information from? Can you point me to the court document because I must have missed it or maybe an interview where she specifically says that? I’m not interested in the media rumours who have made up so much in this case. I’m looking for facts. I’m a mom also.
@@daniellegreen2135 , so was the FBI test illegal if they found something?
How do you get a warrant to run someone’s DNA if you don’t know who the person is… 🤦🏻♂️ IT’S CALLED SOLVING A CRIME!!!
Bingo!
Spot on. 👍
Stupidest argument in the history of trials. Oye
Was it a DNA sample taken at the scene of a heinous crime to determine a suspect? Was it the glove found by a member of the public , missed by the investigators?
@@joeclay5511 The glove is hard to tell when it was placed there, and it was not inside the immediate crime scene.
I like this judge ... his no nonsense approach is awesome.
Ann takes forever to say nothing. I can’t stand it.
Love this judge! He's not letting the defense run the show and calling out their BS!
Bryan is innocent lisa get a clue and use some common sense if you even have any. He literally tore the prosecution up today in the franks hearing and he even knows they lied
@ yeah ok whatever you say 🤣
@@HPAcustomriflesandcerakotelmao yeah aight buddy. We shall wait and see when the trial starts and we shall know the verdict
The attorney's main argument is calling the search illegal so therefore it is illegal. Judge saw right through that.
so well said !! THANK YOU !!! AND THIS JUDGE ROCKS !!!! GO JUDGE GO JUDGE GO JUDGE !!!!!!!!
How did this woman get through law school and pass the bar? Nonsensical argument.
@@cambrie7946 I’m wondering the same thing, but I hope she continues as she’s doing throughout the case. 🤣
That's why she's a court appointed public pretender and not a lawyer with a successful private practice
Dude left DNA on a crime scene, so search is legit….
Sure he did.. how come they never identified the blood dna of an unknown male on the stair handrail? I thought BK acted alone?
The rule of something left behind ....how could any crime be investigated if the law can use what the criminal leaves behind to identify 🤔 a lawyer that supports a criminal to this level is used to weak judges
@@pattiglenn7470 that's not what's happening here, why do you have an opinion when u're not even capable of understanding what's being said?
It was transfer dna. Someone else could have left it. But media ignores that.
not entirely. she just didn't frame her argument correctly. let's say there was no knife sheath but instead it was a tv remote. there could be tons of innocent people who left DNA on that TV remote. her argument is basically a person who is presumed innocent has the expectation that their DNA is private and the court needs a warrant to search it. in the case of a TV remote maybe the court says "no we won't grant a warrant because there isn't enough to suggest that any DNA found on the remote would be that of the murderer and infringing the privacy of this anonymous person who is presumed innocent is not justified". maybe in the case of a knife sheath the court says "we will grant the warrant because there is a strong likelihood that whoever left there DNA on the knife sheath is the murderer and so we can justify infringing their privacy"
Since when is necessary a warrant for searching the trash? I know that once one put something in the trash in the street is public property, no warrant necessary.
I am not arguing this point at all.... one thing that people do NOT think about is WHERE they place their trash for pickup! On THEIR property or on public property. MOST people Never think of that !
In a gated community it’s probably not very easy for one….
@ioanaanaoi8232 Unless the trash is part of the house, like a porch!
Once the trash is in the receptacle and at the curb, there’s no expectation of privacy. Even in a gated community.
I live in Florida and 15ft from the road is an easement for the state to do repairs. Water lines, electric lines, sewage lines etc. They don't have to get your permission to tear up your front yard but fix it b4 they leave..
So Anne Taylor wants everything thrown out because it makes her client look as guilty as he is? Ah ok.
I love that this Judge is a THINKER!!
Yes very bright dude, you can tell!
And VERY PATIENT
@@judydoyle1124all these come with wisdom and confidence . .. I have great admiration for his cache of these things
I.e. the defense attorney is “throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks”.
Actually that’s exactly what’s happening lol
None of it cuz there done
BAM!!
exactly, theyve been doing it the whole time
Hah, did u watch the whole day? L&C isn't showing the rest where the Prosecution lies were exposed one after another. How about the unknown male BLOOD dna found on the stair handrail that the MPD never identified? Or the fact DM's statements didn't match the crime scene?🤔
I like this Judge. How can they violate rights of a mystery person of evidence left at a crime scene
Wow. This judge is crystal sharp.
This Defense Attorney has terrible deportment. She is rude and aggressive toward the Judge, and casting aspersions about him being biased toward the Prosecution. I cannot imagine how she will behave toward witnesses and the effect that her behaviour will have on the Jury.
Projection on your end. The prosecution got eaten alive, if you watched the entire hearing. Which you clearly didn't.
She’s actually pretty amazing at her job. I can only think your comment is based on sexism, that you think she is aggressive because she is a woman and she’s supposed to be sweet or something. She is doing the best job she can to defend her client.
@@GinaWelshIs it a generational thing...projecting criticisms of ability as some form of misogyny?
@@serif392 Dunno, what generation do you think I am?
@ What I do know is that men of every generation commonly criticise strong and forceful women when they value the same qualities in men.
Don’t these 23 & Me companies have people sign something which says their DNA becomes part of the public domain as soon as it’s uploaded?
They claim they do not release it willingly, but will fully comply with legal demands for the information
Once you submit your dna you are subject to searches if the law requires it
Even if there was a provision in the signed something (CONTRACT) that made it clear it would be public, it could still be invalidated because of being an adhesion contract.
Those companies are a front for the intelligence agencies to grab up as much dna as possibly. Go look at 23 & Me's stock price once people found out they were illegally using it to prosecute crimes. It dropped from $320 a share to under $4 bucks.
And if the DNA matches a person, they are contacted before the information is given to LE. For example “Ma’am, it appears that your DNA profile is matching the DNA from a crime scene and LE would like to use your information. Do you allow us to proceed with this?”
Theres NO violation of rights here. You can NOT get a warrant if you dont know WHO you are serving the warrant on in the first place when collecting evidence.
That's not what she's arguing. 🙄
You miss the point. This is not talking about the initial search of the knife sheath which found BK DNA on it. This is about later search of that BK DNA to create a "snippet" that could be used for later searches looking for other people with shared DNA.
That is what she was arguing toward the end. Go back and listen. @@FasterFaster196
@@2Truth4Libertyand that DNA was obtained lawfully. She went back and argued about crime scene DNA and testing outside of codis, and said a search warrant should've been obtained, when in fact the DNA was lawfully obtained, and no warrant needed for testing. Your right to privacy does not protect you from DNA left outside your body. Her argument would be excluding any DNA testing from all cases because DNA is "private".
Isn't this EXACTLY how they got the Golden State Killer?
Absolutely!
YES!!!!
Yep
The GSK was gotten with traditional DNA testing. This case is using Touch DNA which is dubious.
It’s not dubious. His DNA was on apiece of evidence at the crime scene. Period.
These defenses have all the wisdom and character of an arrogant criminology student who has never seen the inside of a courtroom.
I'll bet she really regrets having the trial moved.
Be careful what you wish for ...
Definitely ! She met her match ( actually, far greater) here!
I don’t believe Bryan Kohberger committed these murders! I think it was people who knew them!!
True. The other judge caters to her whim and most of the time 'soft'. But not this judge
No she doesn’t! Listen to the whole freaking hearing. The state has nothing! They need to get all the people involved in this horrible crime
The entire defense seems to be hinged on getting BK off on a technicality. There is no innocent reason for BK's DNA to be found next to one of the victims.
Touch dna isn't the same as direct dna. Was this a plant?
EVERY person who isn't convicted gets off on a "technicality". You're a dip$hit who just listens to and repeats unproven nonsense. In a trial...the defense tries to show that the prosecution is wrong and conducted themselves outside of the law. EVERY F'N TIME🙄
She is talking about using gene9logy websites . Alot of us put our dna on these sites. Law enforcement shouldn't never without a warrant get that information
and your name ain't Gooofuss Girl.
@@matthewbucher8227 DNA can be collected from objects tossed away, cigarettes, cups and from your garbage.
And I will ask again.... why is Mr. Kohberger allowed to be in "street clothes" and not a prison jump suit? This is NOT his trial!
Desperate attempt to show himself as an innocent person.
Valerie,that’s something I don’t understand either!
@valeries929 I still don’t get the joke🧐 You are joking, aren’t you?
It IS his trial. If not his trial…whose trial?
These are pre-trial hearings about admisibility of evidence. @@arribaficationwineho32
This is the real deal people. An American judge no games straight up law man. Love this guy or respect to this guy.
Sue wish this judge was on the Karen read case. The CW shenanigans are shocking
@@Schnickumsyes!!
Way better judge then the last one
No BS with this guy
*than
@ is you or is it you or is you or is he or do you even know?
Are you Izzy or a onesie?
She is desperately trying to find some way to get this excluded. I appreciate the incredibly difficult position she's in but it's painful to watch her make the argument.
What an annoying attorney. She seems to me to be talking down to the
Judge like you would talk to a child.
@@2latesmart62 Are YOU Upset?
wait until you watch and listen to Ashley Jennings 🤯 wooooooah franks hearing for sure 🤞🏼🙏🏼
This was a crime scene. And law enforcement have every right to track it to the person of interest.
Agreed 💯💯
Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhh ! Kinda like a fingerprint, Miss Attorney !
which is why they destroyed the house...right Gomer...oh sorry...Larry.
@@planetclay🤭🤭🤭
☠️
Another raikroad job
She is beyond ridiculous. He is guilty and will be found guilty. Her trying to literally suppress all evidence in this case is just showing his guilt more and more. Also the way he looks w just eyes is so disturbing and extremely creepy!
This is a great judge. She has no standing chance.
@Jennifer-oi8ni Unfortunately, the FBI and Moscow police were not forthright in this case. The FBI did not want to reveal there work, and the same with Moscow police. Somehow Brian Kohlberger's DNA was transferred from one person to the perpetrator who went to a crime scene.
You obviously didn't watch the whole trial today. So many lies from the State were exposed.
How come they found bl00d dna on the stair handrail from a man they never identified?
But does her associate perpetual-smile lawyer have a sitting one?
This feels like a student giving a homework presentation in class, where the professor proceeds to dismantle it bit by bit.
She's just been schooled.
An unprepared student at that!
A pot head student that smoked Willie Nelson grade pot😂😂
Maybe watch the entire hearing before coming to an uneducated conclusion. By the end of this hearing all eyes and ears fall back on the prosecution to provide evidence that Bryan committed these crimes. Which they can't, and the judge eats the prosecution alive. You guys need to learn how to read a room 😂
Go watch the whole day. She destroys all kinds of holes in the State's case, yet curiously the Media keeps that hidden from the public - I wonder why? Do u remember when the "experts" told us c0vid was from Bat Soup? Did u believe them?
@@michaelscott3222 100% Huge discovery facts leaked in this hearing. The fact another man's bl00d was found on the stair handrail which was never identified should be front page news across America. Media suppression in full swing.
In other words let's nitpick the evidence and ignore the crime so the murderer can go free.
I have second hand embarrassment for this defense attorney! Science makes it much harder now for you to beat your murder case. Cry harder!
They are always wasting time. Manipulating the time, the law, and the truth.
Taylor makes MUCH more money in this case than she did in her regular public defender salary.
Mmmmmmmmm......
@@OldGuy555 uh no you absolutely have no clue what you are talking about about
@ YOU are the fool.
Anne Taylor's aalary is public record.
In 2022, Taylor made $65/hour.
She gets $200/hour for Kohberger case.
The more she filibusters with nonsense and spams the court with abject nonsense, the more she can bill the taxpayer for her „services“.
@@taxiuniversum Bingo!
The county pays her $65/hour for her regular public defender work. She gets $200/hour for the Kohberger case.
Is she seriously an attorney? Where did she go to law school?
Pee Wee Herman School of Law
How was it in violation of his rights? This is an extreme case to even suggest! TY judge for using common sense. No legal argument! Done!
Why would you need a warrant for something found at a crime scene! I don’t get it.
Why did they obtain a warrant for kg labtop in custody at the cour de laine forensic lab? They also got one to search bk phone contents- after he was in custody- so yes they need warrants to move Evidence found in a crime scene!
That is not the issue! Uhhg. The police lied about the evidence they had to get the search warrant! They did not use the DNA as a reason to get the warrant!
@@colleen0229 😂🤦
@colleen0229 so if it was found at an active crime scene investigation...they to need a warrant to investigate what they are investigating. You hear how crazy you sound? This has to be a bot account
They don't need a warrant they never did, lawyer is desperately trying
She knows he is guilty and her job is to make the court believe that he is innocent 😅
I didnt go to law school but even i know theres no need for a warrant for trash once it's outside and on the curb for pickup...jezzzus
True but I think she’s primarily opposed to the searches that lead them to his trash in PA in the first place
it needs to be on Public Property to be gone thru.
@MayaGTK Which is insane to think the dna you leave at a crime scene gets any kind of privacy rights.
@@MayaGTKif there was a breach it is a policy breach. DOJ interim policy on IGG isn’t even a law. Pretty crap argument.
@@janeferguson4455 No it doesn't. Once you put your trash "out for collection" it's considered "abandoned" and you no longer have a "right to privacy". It has nothing to do with public/private property.
Defense atty is high. According to her, every criminal who's arrested has a right to privacy of any evidence at a crime scene. How5is she a lawyer?
ABSOULTLY
She's on that special K.
Did u watch the whole day or just this little clipped part? Did u see how she exposed another man's bl00d was found on the stair handrail in the house and was never identified? Also a bl00dy glove outside with another man never identified? How about how the roommate said she wasn't sure what she could remember because she was so drunk and even recanted her testimony? Etc. Go watch. Huge evidence holes.
If you commit a crime, there should be NO expectation of privacy. If you're innocent of the crime, you have nothing to worry about.
There's no expectation of privacy when you leave your DNA at a crime scene. What's Ann Taylor going on about?
Thank You from 🇦🇺Australia.
Love this Judge, who is taking No Nonsense from the Defence Lawyer.‼️
We all know trash isn’t protected property!
Great judge! I’m so sick of all the defense’s antics to delay this trial! And now to throw it out.
There's only touch DNA transferrable DNA at a very gruesome crime scene times 4. Makes no sense!
@Sunshine, the dna is under the snap. How are you going to logically ignore that? Scott has demonstrated many times how hard it is to unsnap his.
So what. It wasn't his DNA or we would have seen that a long time ago, it's a f***[ng sham. Judge has already predetermined by his higher ups, or whoever he listens to, not even a competent judge,disgusting individual, no work, no lab protocols, judge is covering for state. He is pathetic!!!
This was very encouraging to see. This trial needs to start and end to give the poor family some peace ffs.
Except the state was the one failing to give over discovery for over 1.5yrs but ok
She needs to study up on Golden State Killer. Got him the same way.
No, his dna, igg was done differently.
@@FM-br2rmat the end of the day IGG was used in both cases.
There’s been a few criminals caught this way and honestly I see no issue here. But of course all the “he’s innocent” people will argue all day long that it’s wrong.. I call BS!
@@FM-br2rmhow so?
@@allisonangelaflemingif he was truly innocent they would have to explain why the dna was there rather than just try to hide it
Is it just me or is Kohberger staring down his defense attorney like a rare piece of prime rib?
If the suspect would have stayed at the crime scene to tell the police “you can’t search my DNA without my permission,” I guess she would have an argument. Right???
😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂
I have no idea what she is talking about. Trash once thrown out no longer belongs to that person.
Apples and Oranges.
Trash that you voluntarily to throw out versus trash you would hold onto if you could are different.
Her argument is absolutely ridiculous!
There’s only one reason why she’s trying so hard to throw his dna out.
The reason is because it would mean he almost certainly gets acquitted and that's her job...
@ Yeah No
@@nicoler2939 Which part do you disagree with and why?
@ Like I said there’s only one reason why she’s wants it thrown out so bad. Apply some common sense to this.
@@nicoler2939 Yes, and the reason is that it would win the case for her.
It was a violation of the victim’s rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, when they were viciously murdered! They never invited him into their house to murder them; and he’s the one who left DNA!
My exact sentiments. I am glad you wrote this as I was about to d9 the same.
That's not what's being argued.
I'm not sure I'd say "slammed" but rather carefully deconstructed her argument. This seems to be a pretty fundamental issue for the defense.
This attorney is grasping. Leaving dna at a crime scene should be an expectation of privacy? What a joke😢
assuming someone left it there is mind blowing to me... especially on a moveable objectand no other DNA is to be found anywhere else in that house??? Use your brain... it'll help you
@@deathgamer8921 you have absolutely no idea wtf youre talking about at all lol its weird to be this wrong yet still speaking on stuff
@ How am I wrong??? Only touch DNA on a moveable object and no DNA anywhere else.. that's nothing. There was blood on the stair railing and that didn't get tested.. hm.. interesting. You have no idea what they did in this investigation.. its laughable and I feel sorry for you and others that don't see it
And the other dna that was blood not transfer!? Why test that and lean its male but not his then give up
Blood male dna left in rail handle. Not Kohbergers. Thats not more important? And rommate whos statements were put different than she said?
Defense it's laughable at this point. Let's get this horrible case over and get justice for all the victims 🙌🙏
Shows you didn’t listen to hearing! State of as a joke and proves they have absolutely nothing to
Been laughable since Judge Judge's court.
There is no justice if you charge the wrong guy... and these are your rights being trampled on not just BKs! Your own touch DNA is everywhere. In places you never have even been. When you touch a door handle or product at the grocery store and put it back on the shelf. Money or the handle at the gas pump, you transfer your DNA. The murderer is the guy who left the unknown male blood evidence on the stair banister! He is still out there!
You didn't watch the whole hearing. Did u know the police found another man's BL00D on the stairs, yet they never identified this man? 🤔
The longer she goes on with her word salad, the more money she makes by the hour, for tax payers to pay her.
Finally a judge confronting Taylor with common sense. She has been playing the longest stall tactic/double talk aka tax payer paid big bag of money. It’s disgraceful. If she truly thought her client were innocent she would want to have him released asap and have explanations of his whereabouts that night. Love this judge, Justice for the victims/families.. Let’s go!
She’s been the one stalking them has the nerve to moan that her poor client has been in jail for two years! 🤦♀️
OMG She's Saying Because Knife Sheath was unintentionally Abandoned DNA Evid nce Should Be Excluded ?😂😂😂. Too Funny How'd She Pass the Bar
Thank goodness for this replacement judge!
If her client was innocent, she wouldn't be fighting so hard to have the DNA not admitted. He's guilty as F.
His innocence or guilt has nothing to do with how hard she's making an argument. He has the presumption of innocence.
Exactly, Michele. And as for runner, no, what's she's getting at, is many people have actually been set up for all different crimes before, and she's questioning all of it. She said GPS shows he was not at that address, during those times they believe this happened.
She lost the argument when she had zero case law to support her claim. Shes used to the prior Judge who let her run the courtroom. This judge runs his own CR apparently😁
No, not at all. It fails because her client lacks standing based on case law going back to the early ‘80’s
There are many law professors that believe that DNA shouldn't be used to convict the perpetrators. They believe that DNA is too invasive a tool for the legal system to use and it shouldn't be allowed in court... similar to a lie detector test cannot be admitted in a court of trial. So, this is what Taylor is trying to do... set precedence to have it thrown out and not used. She KNOWS that this is the only thing that is connecting BK to the Idaho 4.
Brian, how did your DNA get in a crime scene?
👏👏
His name is BRYAN!
Are you aware of the 3 other males that also left dna at the scene including two different bl*od samples? If not, why you commenting lol
the defense doesn't even want to have to have to come up with a defense for that. That is why they are working really hard to get it surpassed.
@@jgray690 If she dismisses the case then Brian Albert is the primary suspect. Her ‘relations’ will do everything to nail Karen for a crime she didn’t commit. Now Bev is going down with the ship. The sallyport video proves evidence tampering. She can’t escape that
You don’t get privacy if your blood is left at a murder scene. Needing a warrant to match it in a database would be ridiculous.
Can she explain why the FBI wasn’t allowed to search other databases? Which databases? What secrets were there?
There is case law backing up forensic genealogy.
I’ll never get this time back.
Trash is public property. No warrant needed 🙄🙄
Wow took her 3 years to come up with that argument
Two years and two months.
When there’s absolutely nothing but bs connecting bk to the crime besides a movable object id imagine it would take her that long to
@@colleen0229right a car that's unidentifiable that there's also 50k of in the surrounding area. Cell phone data places him away from the scene and the only surviving 'witness' waits 8hrs to alert cops even tho she snap chats all the friend group who arrive to the house before the cops. It was a drug house and everyone knew it.
@@colleen0229😂😂😂😂the case would have been gone long ago.
@@colleen0229 Hundreds of murders go unsolved. As in, no evidence leading back to a suspect. Doesn't mean nobody did it. Flawed logic.
This might be the dumbest defense I’ve ever seen
she should tell the judge why his DNA was found in the house, that would help.
What?
Sarcastic is fantastic 😂
The burden isn't on her. That's why she says they're shifting the burden here
After a few searches, was it even seen or found! Does seem odd that it wasn't found the first few searches. Let's watch the body cams from every search, including the one that found the evidence!
@@janinekeyserin this hearing the burden is on her. That’s why she was allowed rebuttal. This is not a trial