The FBI identified Bryan Kohberger as a potential suspect in the brutal murder of four University of Idaho students after tapping into consumer DNA databases that were supposed to be off-limits to law enforcement, according to newly released records.
The New York Times reports that in a major development in the investigation of the brutal murder of four University of Idaho students who were stabbed to death in the fall of 2022, newly released testimony reveals that the FBI used restricted consumer DNA data to identify Bryan Kohberger as a potential suspect. The decision to access the GEDmatch and MyHeritage databases, which law enforcement officials are not supposed to use, appears to have violated key parameters of a Justice Department policy that requires investigators to operate only in DNA databases that explicitly notify users about potential law enforcement access.
The case highlights both the promise and the unregulated power of genetic technology in an era where millions of people willingly contribute their DNA profiles to recreational databases, often to search for relatives. While some companies allow users to choose whether their DNA information can be used in criminal investigations, the authorities’ decision to circumvent those limits raises concerns about the meaningfulness of the companies’ privacy assurances.
Investigators initially struggled to find leads in the case, despite having a key piece of evidence: DNA on a knife sheath found at the crime scene. After failing to find matches in law enforcement databases and consenting consumer databases, the FBI’s investigative genetic genealogy team compared the DNA profile with GEDmatch and MyHeritage, leading them to Bryan Kohberger, a Ph.D. student in criminology who was not previously on anyone’s radar.
Erin Murphy, a law professor at New York University specializing in DNA and new policing methods, expressed surprise at the FBI’s apparent violation of rules that the federal government had carefully established. She also raised concerns about the lack of repercussions for investigators who violate these rules, stating, “I think what we are teaching law enforcement is that the rules have no meaning.”
However, Steve Kramer, a former FBI lawyer specializing in genetic genealogy investigations, argued that the rules were designed as a framework rather than a legal limitation. He suggested that in serious cases with limited investigative options, such as the Idaho case, investigators may need to take additional steps.
The testimony reveals that Othram, a company specializing in genetic genealogy, was initially hired to analyze the DNA profile and build a family tree. However, when a preliminary report indicated a low match and a potential lead declined to contribute their DNA, the FBI took over the genealogy search and acknowledged turning to MyHeritage and a broader version of GEDmatch that includes people who have not opted in to law enforcement searches.
The defense team has challenged the state’s evidence and argued that the authorities violated Kohberger’s constitutional rights by failing to obtain warrants before searching the DNA data. However, a judge has rejected these arguments as the case moves toward trial this summer.
The use of genetic genealogy in criminal investigations has the potential to prevent other kinds of law enforcement intrusions by narrowing the scope of an investigation. However, there are growing calls for legislation and legal review to establish mandatory parameters for the use of this technology, as the widening tools could bring innocent people under extensive scrutiny or false charges without clear rules.
DNA and genetic genealogy have solved many cold case murders, including the notorious Golden State Killer case.
Read more at the New York Times here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship.
Read the full article here