Brian Buckmire

So for whatever reason, when I touch an object, my skin cells don't flake off at the same rate that yours do, for example, Kena, and I only drop 10 picograms of DNA, but you drop 30. there'd be male DNA on that object, but they would call that inconclusive.

So for whatever reason, when I touch an object, my skin cells don't flake off at the same rate that yours do, for example, Kena, and I only drop 10 picograms of DNA, but you drop 30. there'd be male DNA on that object, but they would call that inconclusive.

And what the defense is arguing here is if you can't say whether or not Brian Koveberger is under these fingernails, what's the relevance of that information? All you're able to say is a human being is under this person's fingernails, and that's not relevant, that's not helping the jury, and that information should not be presented. Now, they took that information and took it to another lab,

And what the defense is arguing here is if you can't say whether or not Brian Koveberger is under these fingernails, what's the relevance of that information? All you're able to say is a human being is under this person's fingernails, and that's not relevant, that's not helping the jury, and that information should not be presented. Now, they took that information and took it to another lab,

And again, I'm talking specifically to New York, can only calculate 20 picograms and four or less people. But there are other labs around the country that have more sensitive instruments. So they can detect less than 20 picograms. They can detect if four or more people have touched an object. So from my understanding is they went to another lab that has more sensitive instruments.

And again, I'm talking specifically to New York, can only calculate 20 picograms and four or less people. But there are other labs around the country that have more sensitive instruments. So they can detect less than 20 picograms. They can detect if four or more people have touched an object. So from my understanding is they went to another lab that has more sensitive instruments.

And when they ran it through that instruments, they were able to say that Brian Koberger is excluded. Because in a case where someone has brutally murdered four individuals, you would suspect that there would be defensive wounds on that individual and the victim would have scratched that person.

And when they ran it through that instruments, they were able to say that Brian Koberger is excluded. Because in a case where someone has brutally murdered four individuals, you would suspect that there would be defensive wounds on that individual and the victim would have scratched that person.

And so if Brian Koberger's DNA is not under their fingernails, they've got a pretty decent argument there.

And so if Brian Koberger's DNA is not under their fingernails, they've got a pretty decent argument there.

So yes and yes. So yes, it would be presented to the jury if the defense felt it necessary to put on their own case. And I would suspect that they would.

So yes and yes. So yes, it would be presented to the jury if the defense felt it necessary to put on their own case. And I would suspect that they would.

So for two reasons, one is you want to get multiple bites at the apple. Let's say this. Let's say I say, Kena, I want to be on your podcast for a number of reasons. I dress really well. I'm a defense attorney and I know like the strategy behind this. Is my strongest argument probably that I know the strategy of another public defender?

So for two reasons, one is you want to get multiple bites at the apple. Let's say this. Let's say I say, Kena, I want to be on your podcast for a number of reasons. I dress really well. I'm a defense attorney and I know like the strategy behind this. Is my strongest argument probably that I know the strategy of another public defender?

Yeah, but I'm also gonna have those other two arguments because maybe you're gonna go, Brian, I want Brian on because I like his suits. And I don't know which argument's really gonna win, so I just throw everyone out. And that's what every defense attorney does. The other reason is you're not just arguing to the judge in front of you, you're also arguing to the appellate judge.

Yeah, but I'm also gonna have those other two arguments because maybe you're gonna go, Brian, I want Brian on because I like his suits. And I don't know which argument's really gonna win, so I just throw everyone out. And that's what every defense attorney does. The other reason is you're not just arguing to the judge in front of you, you're also arguing to the appellate judge.

Because at some point in time, if Brian Koberger is found guilty, you cannot raise arguments on appeal that you did not raise at trial. And you don't know who that appellate judge is going to be. It's those two reasons why you throw everything at a judge.

Because at some point in time, if Brian Koberger is found guilty, you cannot raise arguments on appeal that you did not raise at trial. And you don't know who that appellate judge is going to be. It's those two reasons why you throw everything at a judge.

I think this judge saw, as we all did, how – and I'm not trying to speak poorly of Judge John Judge or anyone else who was on the case prior to. I think it's a difference of opinion, difference of style. But I think this new judge saw how the families, the media, the – just the case in general, the public, saw how the information was rolling out and said, okay, we need a new change of course.

I think this judge saw, as we all did, how – and I'm not trying to speak poorly of Judge John Judge or anyone else who was on the case prior to. I think it's a difference of opinion, difference of style. But I think this new judge saw how the families, the media, the – just the case in general, the public, saw how the information was rolling out and said, okay, we need a new change of course.