Podcasts about igg

Single mom Eileen Zarlenga disappeared from her home on a cold night in March 1988, taking her coat, boots and purse, but leaving behind her three year old daughter.  Eileen remained missing for 4 days, and when she was found, it was not good news. The question of who stabbed the young mother over and over and left her body in a remote patch of woods in Mahoning County, OH would haunt generations of investigators.  When DNA was detected on sexual assault kit swabs, it did not get investigators any closer to an answer.  And when IGG came along and was used to identify Eileen's attacker, real answers remained elusive. Eileen's case is closed, but you won't see the end of this one coming. Head over now to DNA ID on Apple Podcasts. or wherever you listen to podcasts to hear episode 205 in its entirety. You can also visit the DNA ID homepage. Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/morbidology--3527306/support.

Introducing DNA ID Episode 205 The case of Eileen Zarlenga Single mom Eileen Zarlenga disappeared from her home on a cold night in March 1988, taking her coat, boots and purse, but leaving behind her three year old daughter.  Eileen remained missing for 4 days, and when she was found, it was not good news.  The question of who stabbed the young mother over and over and left her body in a remote patch of woods in Mahoning County, OH would haunt generations of investigators.  When DNA was detected on sexual assault kit swabs, it did not get investigators any closer to an answer.  And when IGG came along and was used to identify Eileen's attacker, real answers remained elusive. Eileen's case is closed, but you won't see the end of this one coming.  Head over now to DNA ID on Apple Podcasts. or wherever you listen to podcasts to hear episode 205 in its entirety. You can also visit the DNA ID homepage. 

Introducing DNA ID Episode 205 The case of Eileen Zarlenga Single mom Eileen Zarlenga disappeared from her home on a cold night in March 1988, taking her coat, boots and purse, but leaving behind her three year old daughter.  Eileen remained missing for 4 days, and when she was found, it was not good news.  The question of who stabbed the young mother over and over and left her body in a remote patch of woods in Mahoning County, OH would haunt generations of investigators.  When DNA was detected on sexual assault kit swabs, it did not get investigators any closer to an answer.  And when IGG came along and was used to identify Eileen's attacker, real answers remained elusive. Eileen's case is closed, but you won't see the end of this one coming.  Head over now to DNA ID on Apple Podcasts. or wherever you listen to podcasts to hear episode 205 in its entirety. You can also visit the DNA ID homepage. 

Episode 205 Eileen Zarlenga  Single mom Eileen Zarlenga disappeared from her home on a cold night in March 1988, taking her coat, boots and purse, but leaving behind her three year old daughter.  Eileen remained missing for 4 days, and when she was found, it was not good news.  The question of who stabbed the young mother over and over and left her body in a remote patch of woods in Mahoning County, OH would haunt generations of investigators.  When DNA was detected on sexual assault kit swabs, it did not get investigators any closer to an answer.  And when IGG came along and was used to identify Eileen's attacker, real answers remained elusive. Eileen's case is closed, but you won't see the end of this one coming.  To listen to every episode of DNA: ID ad-free and get other benefits, simply  visit our channel page on Apple Podcasts to get started with an AbJack Insider subscription. Of course, you can also support DNA: ID with a Patreon subscription. Follow us on social media;  find all of our social media links in one spot at our Linktree:  linktr.ee/dnaidpodcast Visit this link to buy DNA ID Merch ©2026 AbJack Entertainment -All rights reserved. This content is the sole property of AbJack Entertainment. Any unauthorized re-selling, re-purposing, or re-distribution, is strictly prohibited, and will be subject to legal action.    

Introducing DNA ID Episode 205 The case of Eileen Zarlenga Single mom Eileen Zarlenga disappeared from her home on a cold night in March 1988, taking her coat, boots and purse, but leaving behind her three year old daughter.  Eileen remained missing for 4 days, and when she was found, it was not good news.  The question of who stabbed the young mother over and over and left her body in a remote patch of woods in Mahoning County, OH would haunt generations of investigators.  When DNA was detected on sexual assault kit swabs, it did not get investigators any closer to an answer.  And when IGG came along and was used to identify Eileen's attacker, real answers remained elusive. Eileen's case is closed, but you won't see the end of this one coming.  Head over now to DNA ID on Apple Podcasts. or wherever you listen to podcasts to hear episode 205 in its entirety. You can also visit the DNA ID homepage. 

Bryan Kohberger's defense filed its third motion to compel discovery in June 2023, arguing that prosecutors had still not turned over important material connected primarily to the DNA investigation. The defense sought records concerning every DNA profile developed during the investigation, not just the male DNA recovered from the snap of the knife sheath. That included information about profiles uploaded into state and national DNA databases, any database hits generated during those searches, laboratory manuals governing the use of those systems, communications between laboratory personnel and investigators, records involving outsourced DNA testing, unexpected laboratory results and corrective actions. Kohberger's attorneys argued that simply receiving the final laboratory conclusions was not enough. They wanted the underlying material necessary for their own experts to evaluate how the testing had been conducted, whether alternative DNA profiles had been identified and whether anything occurring during the laboratory process could undermine or qualify the State's conclusions.The most consequential portion of the motion concerned investigative genetic genealogy, the process investigators used after the sheath DNA failed to produce a traditional CODIS identification. Kohberger's attorneys demanded the genealogy records behind the investigation, including DNA data uploaded to genealogy services, search results, family trees, communications, additional samples collected during the genealogy investigation and information identifying genetic relatives who had appeared as potential matches. The defense maintained that it needed this material to examine the reliability and legality of the process that ultimately helped investigators focus on Kohberger, while prosecutors sought a protective order limiting disclosure of some of the genealogy information because it involved private individuals who had never been suspects. The dispute eventually required extensive briefing, expert declarations and a hearing before Judge John Judge, who ultimately ordered prosecutors to submit certain IGG materials to the court for an in camera review. The third motion to compel therefore became one of the earliest major battles over whether the defense would be permitted to look behind the State's finished DNA evidence and scrutinize the investigative process that had helped lead authorities to Kohberger in the first place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

The State opposed Bryan Kohberger's effort to suppress evidence connected to investigative genetic genealogy, arguing that the IGG process had functioned only as an investigative lead and had not produced the DNA evidence prosecutors ultimately intended to use against him at trial. Prosecutors maintained that the genealogy work pointed investigators toward Kohberger, but that law enforcement then independently collected trash from his family's Pennsylvania home and later obtained a direct buccal swab after his arrest. According to the State, those later samples established the evidentiary comparison to the male DNA recovered from the knife sheath. Because prosecutors were not planning to introduce the family-tree research, genealogy database information or the identities of genetic relatives as proof of guilt, they argued that Kohberger was trying to suppress an investigative technique rather than evidence that would actually be presented to the jury.The State also rejected the defense argument that Kohberger's constitutional rights had been violated by investigators searching genetic genealogy databases. Prosecutors argued that Kohberger had no reasonable expectation of privacy in DNA information voluntarily uploaded by distant relatives to third-party genealogy services and therefore lacked standing to challenge those searches on their behalf. They further maintained that even if the court found some problem with the IGG investigation, suppression still would not automatically follow because investigators had developed additional evidence linking Kohberger to the crime and ultimately obtained his own DNA through lawful means. The prosecution's position was essentially that IGG helped generate a name, not courtroom evidence, and that the defense was attempting to transform a genealogical lead into a Fourth Amendment violation capable of excluding the later DNA comparison.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Bryan Kohberger's defense had been positioned to mount a constitutional challenge to the investigative genetic genealogy, or IGG, techniques authorities used after DNA was recovered from the knife sheath found beneath Madison Mogen's body. Investigators had developed a male DNA profile from the sheath and used genetic genealogy to search for relatives of the unknown contributor, eventually building a family tree that helped point investigators toward Kohberger. The process raised questions among legal scholars about whether law enforcement's use of genetic information submitted by people to genealogy databases could implicate Fourth Amendment privacy protections, particularly when relatives of a suspect had never consented to having their genetic information used in a criminal investigation. Kohberger's attorneys had sought access to the underlying IGG materials, arguing that they needed to examine exactly how investigators conducted the search and whether constitutional or procedural violations occurred along the way.The potential challenge represented largely unsettled legal territory because courts had not yet established broad constitutional protections against investigative genetic genealogy, and prosecutors maintained that the genealogy work had simply provided an investigative lead rather than evidence they intended to present directly against Kohberger at trial. Legal experts explained that this distinction could make suppression difficult because investigators later obtained Kohberger's DNA through traditional means and directly compared it with the sheath profile. Still, the defense had reason to scrutinize whether the genealogy search violated privacy expectations, exceeded database restrictions or improperly influenced subsequent investigative steps. The dispute therefore had implications extending well beyond Kohberger's case, as a successful constitutional challenge could have affected how police departments across the country used rapidly expanding consumer DNA databases to identify suspects in otherwise difficult cases.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Kiran Krishnan, the Founder of Microbiome Labs, joins me again today for Part 2 of the two-part series on how a healthy microbiome impacts longevity.  In Part 1, Kiran provides in-depth examples of why gut health translates into full-body health. He unpacks what spore-based probiotics are and where they come from, and he shares about psycho-biotics for mental health. If you have not yet listened to Part 1, I urge you to go back and listen to it first.  Today, in Part 2, Kiran talks about SIBO and explains what ghost or post-biotics are and how the FODMATE enzyme works. He also talks about immunoglobulins and probiotics for dogs.  Conditions tied to H Pylori Autoimmunity Infertility Reflux disease Gastritis Gastroparesis Gastroesophageal and gastric cancers  About Kiran Krishnan: Kiran Krishnan is trained as a research microbiologist. He left academic research to help bridge the translational gap between research and commercial innovation. He has held leadership roles in international health and wellness companies. He has also founded and scaled research and technology development companies including, most recently, Microbiome Labs, the pre-eminent microbiome therapeutics company in the US integrative medicine market.  Kiran has published numerous studies in peer-reviewed scientific journals and holds international patents in his name. Kiran is a frequent lecturer at nutritional and medical conferences and is a sought-after expert on the human microbiome for health programs.  Kiran is currently the General Manager of Novozymes OneHealth North America and is a science advisor to 5 other companies in this market.  In this episode: How to recover your gut after taking a course of antibiotics. (39:44) Who should not take the Megaspore product? (44:37) Why is it essential for SIBO people to have spore-based probiotics? (45:05) How SIBO impacts liver function. (47:53) How SIBO impacts the anti-microbial protection of the gut. (50:05) How leaky gut impacts bowel motility. (50:44) A key way of stopping SIBO. (53:39) What is happening with those who are not tolerating spore-based probiotics? (56:23) Why do our pets also suffer from leaky gut? (103:29) Conditions that tie to H Pylori. (1:10:32) How does the microbe in ghost (or post-probiotics) remove H Pylori from the body? (1:11:57) Links and resources: Use code HEALGUT to get 10% off ⁠⁠GI Support Use code IGG to get 10% off ⁠⁠SB IGG Coming September 29th: Your Hormone Blueprint Discover what the research really says about hormones, hormone therapy and breast cancer, proper hormone testing, optimal levels, and finding a provider who takes your symptoms seriously. Support the launch by purchasing your copy on September 29th! Available at YourLongevityBlueprint.com, with local copies coming to the Integrative Health and Hormone Clinic in Eastern Iowa this October. Kiran Krishnan's Social Media Links: Kiran Krishnan on ⁠Instagram⁠ (@Kiranbiome) Kiran Krishnan on ⁠YouTube⁠ Relative Links for This Show: ⁠www.microbiomelabs.com⁠  ⁠https://betterbiome.com/⁠ Follow Your Longevity Blueprint  On ⁠Instagram⁠ | ⁠Facebook⁠ | ⁠Twitter⁠ | ⁠YouTube⁠ | ⁠LinkedIn⁠ ⁠Get your copy of the Your Longevity Blueprint book and claim your bonuses here⁠ ⁠Find Dr. Stephanie Gray and Your Longevity Blueprint online⁠   Follow Dr. Stephanie Gray on ⁠Facebook⁠ | ⁠Instagram⁠ | ⁠Youtube⁠ | ⁠Twitter⁠ | ⁠and LinkedIn⁠ ⁠Integrative Health and Hormone Clinic⁠ ⁠Podcast production by Team Podcast

In the lead-up to Bryan Kohberger's trial, some of the most consequential legal fighting centered on the DNA recovered from the knife sheath found beneath Madison Mogen's body and the investigative genetic genealogy, or IGG, process that investigators used to identify Kohberger as a suspect. Authorities had extracted a single-source male DNA profile from the sheath and later sent the sample to Othram, which developed a SNP profile that could be compared against genealogy databases that permitted law-enforcement searches. Investigators used that information to build family trees that eventually pointed toward Kohberger, after which authorities collected trash from his family's Pennsylvania home and obtained DNA that helped connect his family to the sheath sample. Kohberger's defense spent years seeking the underlying IGG records, laboratory materials, family-tree information and details about how Othram and the FBI conducted the genealogy work. That discovery fight produced multiple motions to compel, closed hearings and court-ordered disclosures under seal as the defense argued that it needed the material to examine whether the investigative process had been scientifically reliable and constitutionally permissible.The fight eventually moved from obtaining the evidence to trying to keep it out of court altogether. Kohberger's attorneys argued that law enforcement had violated his constitutional rights by conducting the IGG investigation without a warrant and by later obtaining DNA through a trash pull at his parents' home, contending that evidence developed from those steps and subsequent warrants should be suppressed as fruit of an unlawful search. Judge Steven Hippler rejected that argument in February 2025, ruling that Kohberger had not established a constitutionally protected privacy interest that made the IGG process or abandoned trash unlawful searches and declining to suppress the resulting evidence. The defense then continued attacking the genealogy evidence through motions in limine, arguing that the State should not be permitted to present the IGG process to the jury and raising separate challenges involving terminology such as “touch” or “contact” DNA and the disclosure of expert testimony. The State maintained that IGG had primarily been an investigative lead rather than the evidentiary foundation of its case, while prosecutors intended to rely on the direct comparison between Kohberger's DNA and the profile recovered from the sheath. By the time trial approached, the DNA battle had therefore become two interconnected fights: whether the genetic genealogy that led investigators to Kohberger had been lawfully conducted, and exactly how much of that complicated investigative history the jury would ultimately be allowed to hear.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In the lead-up to Bryan Kohberger's trial, the court issued an important order governing investigative genetic genealogy, or IGG, material connected to the identification of Kohberger as a suspect. The dispute centered on the genetic genealogy work investigators used after DNA recovered from the knife sheath at the King Road crime scene did not initially identify a suspect through traditional law-enforcement databases. Kohberger's defense sought access to the underlying IGG records, arguing that it needed to examine how investigators moved from the unknown DNA profile to Kohberger and whether the process complied with applicable policies, privacy protections, and constitutional requirements. Prosecutors resisted broad disclosure, maintaining that much of the genealogy information involved private individuals who had nothing to do with the case and that the IGG process had functioned primarily as an investigative lead rather than evidence the state intended to present to the jury.The court ultimately required the state to provide the defense with certain IGG-related materials while placing significant restrictions on their use and disclosure. The judge recognized that Kohberger's attorneys were entitled to investigate the process that had helped focus law enforcement on their client, but also sought to protect the privacy of uninvolved genetic relatives and people whose genealogical information had been examined during the investigation. The order therefore reflected a compromise: the defense gained access to material necessary to evaluate and potentially challenge the genealogy investigation, while sensitive information remained subject to protective measures and limited distribution. The ruling was significant because it gave Kohberger's lawyers an opportunity to scrutinize one of the most consequential investigative steps in the case, even though prosecutors maintained that the eventual direct DNA comparison between Kohberger and the sheath sample, rather than the genealogy search itself, was the evidence they relied upon to connect him to the crime scene.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In the lead-up to Bryan Kohberger's trial, the court issued an important order governing investigative genetic genealogy, or IGG, material connected to the identification of Kohberger as a suspect. The dispute centered on the genetic genealogy work investigators used after DNA recovered from the knife sheath at the King Road crime scene did not initially identify a suspect through traditional law-enforcement databases. Kohberger's defense sought access to the underlying IGG records, arguing that it needed to examine how investigators moved from the unknown DNA profile to Kohberger and whether the process complied with applicable policies, privacy protections, and constitutional requirements. Prosecutors resisted broad disclosure, maintaining that much of the genealogy information involved private individuals who had nothing to do with the case and that the IGG process had functioned primarily as an investigative lead rather than evidence the state intended to present to the jury.The court ultimately required the state to provide the defense with certain IGG-related materials while placing significant restrictions on their use and disclosure. The judge recognized that Kohberger's attorneys were entitled to investigate the process that had helped focus law enforcement on their client, but also sought to protect the privacy of uninvolved genetic relatives and people whose genealogical information had been examined during the investigation. The order therefore reflected a compromise: the defense gained access to material necessary to evaluate and potentially challenge the genealogy investigation, while sensitive information remained subject to protective measures and limited distribution. The ruling was significant because it gave Kohberger's lawyers an opportunity to scrutinize one of the most consequential investigative steps in the case, even though prosecutors maintained that the eventual direct DNA comparison between Kohberger and the sheath sample, rather than the genealogy search itself, was the evidence they relied upon to connect him to the crime scene.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In the lead-up to Bryan Kohberger's trial, some of the most consequential legal fighting centered on the DNA recovered from the knife sheath found beneath Madison Mogen's body and the investigative genetic genealogy, or IGG, process that investigators used to identify Kohberger as a suspect. Authorities had extracted a single-source male DNA profile from the sheath and later sent the sample to Othram, which developed a SNP profile that could be compared against genealogy databases that permitted law-enforcement searches. Investigators used that information to build family trees that eventually pointed toward Kohberger, after which authorities collected trash from his family's Pennsylvania home and obtained DNA that helped connect his family to the sheath sample. Kohberger's defense spent years seeking the underlying IGG records, laboratory materials, family-tree information and details about how Othram and the FBI conducted the genealogy work. That discovery fight produced multiple motions to compel, closed hearings and court-ordered disclosures under seal as the defense argued that it needed the material to examine whether the investigative process had been scientifically reliable and constitutionally permissible.The fight eventually moved from obtaining the evidence to trying to keep it out of court altogether. Kohberger's attorneys argued that law enforcement had violated his constitutional rights by conducting the IGG investigation without a warrant and by later obtaining DNA through a trash pull at his parents' home, contending that evidence developed from those steps and subsequent warrants should be suppressed as fruit of an unlawful search. Judge Steven Hippler rejected that argument in February 2025, ruling that Kohberger had not established a constitutionally protected privacy interest that made the IGG process or abandoned trash unlawful searches and declining to suppress the resulting evidence. The defense then continued attacking the genealogy evidence through motions in limine, arguing that the State should not be permitted to present the IGG process to the jury and raising separate challenges involving terminology such as “touch” or “contact” DNA and the disclosure of expert testimony. The State maintained that IGG had primarily been an investigative lead rather than the evidentiary foundation of its case, while prosecutors intended to rely on the direct comparison between Kohberger's DNA and the profile recovered from the sheath. By the time trial approached, the DNA battle had therefore become two interconnected fights: whether the genetic genealogy that led investigators to Kohberger had been lawfully conducted, and exactly how much of that complicated investigative history the jury would ultimately be allowed to hear.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the lead-up to Bryan Kohberger's trial, the court issued an important order governing investigative genetic genealogy, or IGG, material connected to the identification of Kohberger as a suspect. The dispute centered on the genetic genealogy work investigators used after DNA recovered from the knife sheath at the King Road crime scene did not initially identify a suspect through traditional law-enforcement databases. Kohberger's defense sought access to the underlying IGG records, arguing that it needed to examine how investigators moved from the unknown DNA profile to Kohberger and whether the process complied with applicable policies, privacy protections, and constitutional requirements. Prosecutors resisted broad disclosure, maintaining that much of the genealogy information involved private individuals who had nothing to do with the case and that the IGG process had functioned primarily as an investigative lead rather than evidence the state intended to present to the jury.The court ultimately required the state to provide the defense with certain IGG-related materials while placing significant restrictions on their use and disclosure. The judge recognized that Kohberger's attorneys were entitled to investigate the process that had helped focus law enforcement on their client, but also sought to protect the privacy of uninvolved genetic relatives and people whose genealogical information had been examined during the investigation. The order therefore reflected a compromise: the defense gained access to material necessary to evaluate and potentially challenge the genealogy investigation, while sensitive information remained subject to protective measures and limited distribution. The ruling was significant because it gave Kohberger's lawyers an opportunity to scrutinize one of the most consequential investigative steps in the case, even though prosecutors maintained that the eventual direct DNA comparison between Kohberger and the sheath sample, rather than the genealogy search itself, was the evidence they relied upon to connect him to the crime scene.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In the lead-up to Bryan Kohberger's trial, the court issued an important order governing investigative genetic genealogy, or IGG, material connected to the identification of Kohberger as a suspect. The dispute centered on the genetic genealogy work investigators used after DNA recovered from the knife sheath at the King Road crime scene did not initially identify a suspect through traditional law-enforcement databases. Kohberger's defense sought access to the underlying IGG records, arguing that it needed to examine how investigators moved from the unknown DNA profile to Kohberger and whether the process complied with applicable policies, privacy protections, and constitutional requirements. Prosecutors resisted broad disclosure, maintaining that much of the genealogy information involved private individuals who had nothing to do with the case and that the IGG process had functioned primarily as an investigative lead rather than evidence the state intended to present to the jury.The court ultimately required the state to provide the defense with certain IGG-related materials while placing significant restrictions on their use and disclosure. The judge recognized that Kohberger's attorneys were entitled to investigate the process that had helped focus law enforcement on their client, but also sought to protect the privacy of uninvolved genetic relatives and people whose genealogical information had been examined during the investigation. The order therefore reflected a compromise: the defense gained access to material necessary to evaluate and potentially challenge the genealogy investigation, while sensitive information remained subject to protective measures and limited distribution. The ruling was significant because it gave Kohberger's lawyers an opportunity to scrutinize one of the most consequential investigative steps in the case, even though prosecutors maintained that the eventual direct DNA comparison between Kohberger and the sheath sample, rather than the genealogy search itself, was the evidence they relied upon to connect him to the crime scene.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

In this week's EquiManagement Report, we share insights on implementing text communication in your equine practice, study findings about a stallside IgG assay for foals, and recent disease alerts from the EDCC.Brought to you by Equimanagement.com.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

On January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this SRNA “Ask the Expert” episode, GG deFiebre spoke with Dr. Michael Levy and Dr. Benjamin Greenberg about optic neuritis and how it is most often linked to multiple sclerosis but can also be idiopathic or associated with MOGAD and NMOSD. They compared differences across these conditions (including age patterns, bilateral involvement, severity, exam findings, and typical recovery), outlined diagnostic workups such as MRI, antibody testing, and spinal fluid studies, and reviewed acute treatments [03:14]. The discussion also covered emerging therapies like Pivikto for neuroprotection and efgartigimod alfa to lower IgG as a potential alternative to plasma exchange, and examined challenges in remyelination and stem-cell delivery approaches like Q-Cells while cautioning against unproven stem cell clinics [11:57].Benjamin M. Greenberg, MD, MHS is a Professor and the Cain Denius Scholar in Mobility Disorders in the Department of Neurology [https://utswmed.org/why-utsw/departments/neurology/] at UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, Texas. He currently serves as the Vice Chair of Translational Research and Strategic Initiatives for the Department of Neurology. He is also the interim Director of the Multiple Sclerosis Center [https://utswmed.org/locations/aston/multiple-sclerosis-and-neuroimmunology-clinic/] and the Director of the Neurosciences Clinical Research Center. In addition, he serves as Director of the Transverse Myelitis and Neuromyelitis Optica Program and the Pediatric Demyelinating Disease Program [https://www.childrens.com/specialties-services/specialty-centers-and-programs/neurology/demyelinating-disease-program] at Children's Medical Center. Prior to his recruitment to UT Southwestern in 2009, Dr. Greenberg was on the faculty of the Johns Hopkins Division of Neuroimmunology, serving as the Director of the Encephalitis Center and Co-Director of the nation's first dedicated Transverse Myelitis Center. Dr. Greenberg splits his clinical time between adult and pediatric patients at William P. Clements Jr. and Zale Lipshy University Hospitals, Parkland, and Children's Medical Center. His research focuses on better diagnosing, prognosticating, and treating demyelinating diseases and nervous system infections. He also coordinates clinical trials to evaluate new treatments to prevent neurologic damage and restore function to affected patients. Michael Levy, MD, PhD is a recognized neurologist with over 15 years of clinical and research expertise in rare neuroimmunological disorders. He established the Neuroimmunology Clinic and Research Laboratory at Massachusetts General Hospital and is the Research Director in the Division of Neuroimmunology and Neuroinfectious Disease. Previously, Dr. Levy was on the faculty at Johns Hopkins University and was the founding Director of their Neuromyelitis Optica Clinic. Clinically, Dr. Levy cares for patients with MOG antibody disease (MOGAD), neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD), and idiopathic transverse myelitis (TM). Dr. Levy is also the principal investigator (PI) on numerous patient studies and drug trials for new and improved treatments for these disorders. In 2022, Dr. Levy became the lead principal investigator for the two worldwide clinical trials in MOG antibody disease. In the lab, Dr. Levy's research focuses on the development of animal models of NMO and MOG with the goal of tolerization as a sustainable long-term treatment. Dr. Levy has more than 200 peer-reviewed research articles, reviews and editorials, and 3 patents covering NMO tolerization therapy, TM diagnostics, and stem cell regeneration approaches.00:00 Welcome01:02 Optic Neuritis Basics02:27 Causes and Percentages03:14 MS vs NMO vs MOG06:07 Workup and Testing07:51 Acute Attack Treatment09:30 Recovery and Vision Measures11:57 Pivikto Neuroprotection15:30 Efgartigimod vs Plasma Exchange17:59 Repair vs Remyelination20:15 Q-Cells and Stem Cell Delivery22:22 Closing

Arguably the most important first step in the life of any calf is successful establishment of passive immunity through colostrum management. This key touchpoint ensures easy newborn calf management for weeks in the future and improved pay price for your bull calves. Colostrum replacers occasionally need fed, for a variety of reasons. Understanding the key details of absorption, allows colostrum replacer manufacturers to optimize their product and therefore your success. How does dilution impact the absorption of the colostrum replacer, based on the rate of abomasal emptying? Does this impact the calf's IgG absorption and ultimately success of passive transfer? Listen in to Dr. Alberto Lopez has he describes the results of his recently released research and observations from the field. Topics of discussion 1:43      Introduction of Dr. Alberto Lopez 2:39      Project design/treatments   3:08      150 IgG replacer used 4:55      Different CR products on the market  5:23      Osmolarity in colostrum 6:44      Maternal colostrum enhancement – impact on osmolarity 8:17      Path of colostrum once it leaves the tube 8:33      High osmolarity takes longer to feed, and digest 9:58      Should producers measure osmolarity?   11:17    Measuring / tracking successful transfer of passive immunity (STPI) 13:29    Calf buyer pay price 15:03    How did dilution impact IgG absorption 16:06    IgG upper limit maxing out absorption 17:27    Abomasal emptying 22:23    No difference in IgG absorption in differing dilution 27:35    What do you want ‘boots on the ground' dairymen to know about your project  Featured Article: The effect of dilution of colostrum replacer on IgG absorption, abomasal emptying rate, and gastrointestinal permeability in newborn Holstein calves #2xAg2030; #journalofdairyscience; #openaccess; #MODAIRY; #IgG; #colostrum; #colostrumreplacer; #colostrumenhancement; #calf; #STPI; #dairysciencedigest; #ReaganBluel  

Episode: 00327 Released on July 13, 2026 Description:  Investigative genetic genealogy is helping solve cold cases, identify unknown victims, and generate leads that traditional investigative methods could not uncover. But where do law enforcement analysts fit into this rapidly evolving field? In the inaugural episode of LEAN (Law Enforcement Analysis Networks), host Jason Elder speaks with Christine Fiechter and Kimm Barnes of the newly formed Investigative Genetic Genealogy Association (IGGA). Christine and Kimm explain the fundamentals of investigative genetic genealogy, how DNA matches and family trees are used to develop investigative leads, and some of the common misconceptions surrounding the practice. They introduce IGGA's mission and its three pillars of education, networking, and professionalism while discussing the association's role in bringing together professionals from law enforcement, genealogy, forensic science, academia, and the private sector. The conversation also explores opportunities for law enforcement analysts to enter the IGG field, training pathways, gaining leadership support, the advantages and challenges faced by smaller agencies, and the evolving legal and ethical landscape surrounding IGG. Whether you are already working with investigative genetic genealogy or simply curious about where your analytical skills could take you next, this episode demonstrates why analysts may already possess one of the most important IGG skills: the ability to connect the dots. LEAN (Law Enforcement Analysis Networks) is a recurring Analyst Talk series connecting analysts with the professional associations, communities, and networks that can support their careers and professional growth. Each LEAN episode introduces an organization of interest to the law enforcement analysis profession, explores what it does and who it serves, and highlights opportunities for analysts to learn, connect, contribute, and get involved.  

Episode 195 DOE ID Pati Lisa Rust and Patricia Falls Ritchie Today's DOE: ID episode covers two unrelated cases out of Palm Beach County, Florida.  The discovery of the remains of two different Jane Does, one in the 1970s and one in the 1980s, led investigators nowhere. With contemporary identification tools and resources limited, there was not much that could be done – even though both women are believed to be homicide victims. Thanks to IGG, we now know the names of Pati Lisa Rust and Patricia Falls Ritchie, whose cases are unrelated but are a stark reminder of just how many female murder victims have yet to receive justice. To listen to every episode of DNA: ID ad-free and get other benefits, simply  visit our channel page on Apple Podcasts to get started with an AbJack Insider subscription. Of course, you can also support DNA: ID with a Patreon subscription. Follow us on social media;  find all of our social media links in one spot at our Linktree:  linktr.ee/dnaidpodcast Visit this link to buy DNA ID Merch ©2026 AbJack Entertainment -All rights reserved. This content is the sole property of AbJack Entertainment. Any unauthorized re-selling, re-purposing, or re-distribution, is strictly prohibited, and will be subject to legal action.  

Episode 194 Christine Prince, Claire Samson, and Gracelyn Greenidge  The shocking murders of three women in Toronto, Canada spanned the years 1982 to 1997.  The cases were so dissimilar, no one would ever have connected them.  But science did – DNA from all three cases linked them to the same offender.  Toronto Police Services cold case investigators could not make sense of the connection, as there was no discernable pattern or commonality.  It took IGG to provide the answer they were seeking – the name of the man who took the lives of three women, a predator who left behind more questions than answers. To listen to every episode of DNA: ID ad-free and get other benefits, simply  visit our channel page on Apple Podcasts to get started with an AbJack Insider subscription. Of course, you can also support DNA: ID with a Patreon subscription. Follow us on social media;  find all of our social media links in one spot at our Linktree:  linktr.ee/dnaidpodcast Visit this link to buy DNA ID Merch ©2026 AbJack Entertainment -All rights reserved. This content is the sole property of AbJack Entertainment. Any unauthorized re-selling, re-purposing, or re-distribution, is strictly prohibited, and will be subject to legal action.    

Welcome back to our weekend Cabral HouseCall shows!   This is where we answer our community's wellness, weight loss, and anti-aging questions to help people get back on track!   Check out today's questions:    Kay: Hi Dr. Cabral, Thanks for your very informative and interesting podcasts. How would you advise a post-menopausal 60 y.o family member if they tested low in ferritin (39.4 ng/mL)? I've read that this biomarker shows how much energy your body's cells have and low levels would result in symptoms like fatigue, low energy/easily tired and excessive hair shedding. This family member suffers from these symptoms. Other biomarkers revealed low AM cortisol and low LDL-C/ApoB ratio (1.1) and low basal metabolic rate of 1143 kcals/day. Although her TSH tested normal (1.3 uIU/mL), she's been on levothyroxine 75 mcg to manage hypothyroid. Her high-sensitivity CRP was not optimal at 1.49 mg/L and she has a family history of heart disease. What would you recommend for this family member? Thanks      Earl: I am currently on 20 mg of lisinopril daily. Also, my GFR is 62. Would either of these be a concern when considering creatine?       Alesi: Dr.Cabral, can you please explain Alpha-gal syndrom? Why does it happen, how to confirm it by testing and how would you approach it? Is it treatable? Thank you      Peter: Hello, Dr.Cabral. I am an integrative health practitioner and would like to thank you for helping me understand the underlying causes of human imbalances. There is one thing that makes no sense to me though…regarding IgG testing, why would you recommend to test every year? Why doesn't suffice to test once and simply stay away from intolerant food items? Why would these intolerances change? Also, in my country there are IgG4 vs IgG1-3 testing options, what are the differences? Thank you very much for your time and knowledge you share with us.       Dipali: Hi I want to start 7 days detox plan, I already did your minerals and heavy metal test, I got my results back. My question is I am taking berberine, oregano oil and magnesium citrate,( I am prediabetic my Hba1c is 6.2)do I need to stop before starting detox method. Thanks       Thank you for tuning into today's Cabral HouseCall and be sure to check back tomorrow where we answer more of our community's questions!      - - - Show Notes and Resources: StephenCabral.com/3774 - - - Get a FREE Copy of Dr. Cabral's Book: The Rain Barrel Effect - - - Join the Community & Get Your Questions Answered: CabralSupportGroup.com - - - Dr. Cabral's Most Popular At-Home Lab Tests: > Complete Minerals & Metals Test (Test for mineral imbalances & heavy metal toxicity) - - - > Complete Candida, Metabolic & Vitamins Test (Test for 75 biomarkers including yeast & bacterial gut overgrowth, as well as vitamin levels) - - - > Complete Stress, Mood & Metabolism Test (Discover your complete thyroid, adrenal, hormone, vitamin D & insulin levels) - - - > Complete Food Sensitivity Test (Find out your hidden food sensitivities) - - - > Complete Omega-3 & Inflammation Test (Discover your levels of inflammation related to your omega-6 to omega-3 levels) - - - Get Your Question Answered On An Upcoming HouseCall: StephenCabral.com/askcabral - - - Would You Take 30 Seconds To Rate & Review The Cabral Concept? The best way to help me spread our mission of true natural health is to pass on the good word, and I read and appreciate every review!