Attorneys for a man charged with murder in connection with the killings of four University of Idaho students are seeking to have most of the evidence in the case thrown out, citing concerns over the constitutionality of the genetic investigation process. The defense team argues that the search warrants in the case were tainted by alleged police misconduct. The two-day hearing on the matter began on Thursday, with a significant portion conducted behind closed doors.
The defendant, charged with four counts of murder in the deaths of the students, stood silent when asked to enter a plea, leading to a not-guilty plea entered on his behalf. Prosecutors have indicated they will pursue the death penalty if he is convicted.
The defense contends that law enforcement violated the defendant's constitutional rights by using Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG) to identify potential suspects. The IGG process involves analyzing DNA samples found at crime scenes and uploading them to genealogy databases to identify possible relatives of the individual linked to the DNA.
In this case, investigators used touch DNA found on a knife sheath at the crime scene to identify the defendant as a possible suspect through the IGG process. The defense argues that warrants were not obtained for various stages of the investigation, including the analysis of DNA samples and the search of genealogy databases.
Prosecutors maintain that the use of IGG is constitutional and that the defendant's privacy rights were not violated. They argue that the defendant's DNA found at the crime scene does not warrant privacy protection and that the investigative techniques used were within legal bounds.
The defense also alleges that law enforcement officers misled the court when seeking search warrants for the defendant's property and DNA. They claim that crucial information, such as witness statements casting doubt on the defendant's involvement, was omitted from the warrant applications.
Prosecutors counter that law enforcement provided accurate and up-to-date information in the warrant applications and refute the defense's claims of deliberate falsehoods. The hearing is ongoing, with further proceedings expected to be livestreamed for public viewing.
