What Motions Will Kohberger’s Attorney File Next?

Bryan Kohberger’s case is taking another interesting twist as the defense attorney prepares for a series of motions leading up to the trial. The focus of these motions will be on challenging the use of DNA evidence obtained through the IgG database, as detailed in the “Hidden Killers” podcast with Tony Brueski and defense attorney Bob Motta, host of the “Defense Diaries” podcast.
 
 Motta predicts that the defense will file a motion to suppress the DNA evidence or to quash the arrest, arguing that law enforcement accessed private databases, which is not allowed. However, the prosecution contends that they are not using the IgG profile but have Kohberger’s DNA and know it matches what was found on the crime scene.
 
 The argument here centers on the expectation of privacy in one’s DNA, and by extension, their family’s DNA. Motta passionately argues that there is a privacy expectation in our family’s DNA, contrasting it with sending a text message, where one voluntarily relinquishes their privacy. However, one does not have control over their family’s DNA, making it a different and novel argument.
 
 With advancements in technology making it easier for law enforcement to access genealogical information, Motta asserts the necessity of putting a “governor” on how this technology is used. He advocates for a requirement of probable cause and a search warrant before law enforcement can access IgG databases or any non-private databases. This would prevent law enforcement from bypassing traditional methods and relying solely on DNA, which can be easily transferred and create a dangerous, slippery slope if not regulated.
 
 Motta also predicts that if Kohberger made a statement to law enforcement, a motion to suppress the statement might be filed, depending on the circumstances. However, the main focus remains on the Fourth Amendment attack on the DNA evidence.
 
 The upcoming battles over the admissibility of evidence in pretrial motions will be crucial in shaping the trial. Motta explains that the real war in any trial is fought in the pretrial motion phase, as it determines what evidence will be included or excluded at trial. He anticipates a lot of motion work and stresses the importance of these battles, suggesting they should be televised as they play a significant role in the trial’s outcome.
 
 Ultimately, Motta believes that the issue of privacy expectation in family DNA needs to be decided at the Supreme Court level, as it is a matter of interpretation of law and could have wide-reaching impacts on civil liberties and law enforcement powers. Even if a statute is made, it will still need to be litigated to be fleshed out, highlighting the necessity for the highest court to weigh in on this significant issue.
 
 As the case progresses, it remains to be seen how the court will rule on these motions and what impact it will have on the trial and future cases involving DNA evidence. The discussions on the “Hidden Killers” podcast provide an insightful analysis of the legal strategies and arguments that will be made in this case, shedding light on the complexities and implications of using advanced technology in criminal investigations.
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com