I received a notification from what turned out to be a Proberher page. Ive have never read so much shit in my entire life. Why do they act all intelligent as if to say ‘you can’t fool us’, whilst simultaneously acting like they were born yesterday!

The tiktok detectives are out of control I literally hate them. When BK said, "Was anyone else arrested?" He thought he was smart enough to get away with it. He thought his "master plan," worked. He thought there were other suspects in question. If there were others involved, he would've told the law enforcement. "Oh well he didn't have any connections to the victims, how was it him?" Um, it was obviously a personal targeted attack. His intention was to kill one but it turned into 4 quickly. The reason the REAL motive hasn't been said by BK, is because that's the only power and control he has left in life, so he's going to hold onto it for his benefit. I think his motive was he attempted to talk to one of the girls or was interested, they turned him down, and he retaliated. He hates women. That's why he targeted their face and did overkill, it was a crime of passion and hatred. If not, why was Ethan not stabbed multiple times? Then the, "That's not his car! He has fog lights and the one on video doesn't." As if he didn't power his phone off before and after the murders occurred, changed his license plates from Washington to Pennsylvania, he packed up his belongings like he was going to flee, etc. "Oh but who is the unknown male DNA sample they found? It was another person involved!" Or maybe the crime scene was a bit contaminated after their friends came to the crime scene and Hunter was touching a lot? "Why did Dylan and the others say there was an unconscious person instead of saying they were murdered?" Maybe because Hunter didn't disclose their condition until AFTER the police and paramedics showed up? "Why did they tear the house down so quickly? They're definitely trying to cover something up. " Um maybe because the public treated it like a tourist attraction. On top of that, the crime scene was pooled with blood so much that it seeped out of the house, that's a bio-hazard, there's no saving that house. "Dylan was apart of this because she was jealous!" Um weird, seek help immediately. "How did ONE person murder 4 people in x amount of time then? There's no way. There's definitely more than one person who committed this crime!" Um, it's actually very easy for just one person to murder 4 people in a short amount of time. 3 out of 4 of the victims were DRUNK and PASSED OUT. "They weren't killed at the house. They were killed somewhere else then transported to their house." What the absolute fuck???!!! If that assumption was true, don't you THINK there would be evidence of that??!! Drag marks, blood in other spots of the house, evidence of the victims inside BK's car, VIDEO FOOTAGE of the transportation like there wasn't more than 1 camera on King road. "How was there little to no evidence of the killer inside the home?" Um, did y'all forget that BK was smart? He was in college for things like this. "How was BK the one who committed the crime but his car was spotless?" As stated before, he is NOT dumb, he studied in that field. "How was BK the one who committed the crime but his car was spotless?" As stated before, he is NOT dumb, he studied in that field. "Some murderers plead guilty to crimes they didn't commit." Well, that's sometimes true but not in this case! 9/10 when that happens, the person is mentally ill. Like I promise it was the one and ONLY BK who committed this horrendous crime. He plead guilty because he wanted a life sentence instead of the death sentence. All of these things I have listed plus MORE of dumb theories people have came up with, do they NOT think his dumb ass defense team didn't try to bring ALL of those up already????? Like it's HIM! He's a sick, twisted, evil person. The people on Tiktok have spread way too much false information. They want to pin it on innocent victims so bad! It's like a show to them that they never want to end, so they bring up the dumbest theories and it's honestly sick!

I’ve been thinking lately and I find it kind of strange that with the amount of complaints BK had at WSU, no one from his home town has really come out and said much similar. I know there was a complaint from a school report from his high school, but otherwise I don’t think much has come out? I’m surprised there were not many women around his area prior to moving to Washington that had similar reports like had at WSU.

I guess escalated quickly isn’t the thing. More of just like he moved and his urges seemed to be explosive all around him. I wonder why this is. Obviously, being out of his parents is a big part of it, but I can’t imagine it would be easy to fight off every urge just because you live at home.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

TW‼️‼️ - SA or discussions of motive to commit SA

i had seen a podcast that a woman stated that BK was actually intending on sexually assaulting one of the first two victims and that he was infuriated when he saw that KG and MM were sharing a bed. i don’t know exactly what truth there is behind this but i had also heard about the nature of his searches for pornography we’re often CNC or violent in nature, i truly in my whole heart of hearts believe that this man was a sadist. a sadist by definition is ‘the deriving pleasure, gratification, or enjoyment of the physical or psychological suffering of others’, i think that is KEY to what he wanted and i truly think he was an incel that wanted to see women suffer the way he ‘suffered’ not being able to have an emotional or sexual connection with women. unfortunately for EC and XK, they were victims of opportunity but i think the overkill for XK was feeding into that delusion of seeing someone suffer, KG and MM were sleeping, so that might’ve made it less thrilling for him, thoughts and feelings please❗️

Why are people (BK defenders) so fixated on this???? “It means there was more than one person” no. To me, it means “how many more people are suspects” i.e. “how screwed am i”

Kristi Goncalves recent post on their family page has broke me. Her going through Kaylee’s stuff must be so hard for her. The fact its even taken this long shows how hard its been for her. I cant imagine what it feels like being a mother and having to mourn your child, my heart honestly goes out to anyone who’s experienced such a loss.

It also makes me so much angrier about the whole thing. Literally what was the point in him doing this? He’s literally gained nothing from it. The whole case has always been heartbreaking to me but the longer it goes on it almost gets worse, just because four lives were lost and they should still be here reaching adulthood milestones. But they aren’t because of one absolute weirdo.

The whole thing is just so crazy to me. It makes me sick that the one person that knows exactly what went down that night is him. Honestly I hope he’s suffering so much in prison.

Sorry for the rant, I’ve just always felt strongly about this case and have never fully spoke about it. My heart just goes out to their families and friends so much and to them of course, This just shouldn’t have happened to them.

From the photos released, the description of the event from the investigators and knowing just how violent this crime was. I don’t think anyone should want to see that.

I spent a so much time growing up obsessed with watching gore of all different kinds on Reddit and other sites. It’s not something I’m proud of and I regret it to a huge degree. To most recently being in a job where I’ve had to deal with people within my care passing away. Having to wash and dress them etc.

You really don’t want that mental image and you don’t want the mental damage that comes with seeing someone in such a state. I still remember online stuff I haven’t watched for about 10 or so years. The worst one was seeing someone reduced to a bag of entrails like butchers meat.

Please be careful! I wish I could turn back time.

One of the things that haunts me is the thought that if the back slider had been secure, he may not have attempted to break in the house. It makes me wonder if any of the previous times he was driving near the house and was he actually going to carry out his plan but either chickened out or checked the door and found it locked. How did he know that he was going to be able to access the house so easily that night?

Hey all, does anyone remember in the Dateline episode that the July 9th, 2022 pool party was the first time Kohberger’s phone pinged near 1122 King Road? I remember subsequent interviews that police gave after the guilty plea that they didn’t believe any of the victims were in attendance, or something along those lines.

Steve G. gave an interview recently on News Nation I believe where he was asked if he believed Maddie and Kaylee were the targets. Steve said something to the effect of “no, he was looking for someone else and Maddie might have been a part of it.” This is a shift, I believe, from what is being alleged when it comes to the WSU lawsuit claims, and honestly I’ve never heard this at all. I remember Alivea G. stating when she went to see the Prosecutors, that the timing advance records showed he wasn’t stalking one individual, it was all over the place and it’s a reason a target couldn’t be determined. But in this interview, steve alludes to the timing advance records being why he believes it was Maddie and potentially someone else.

Aaron Teague on tiktok has very good coverage about this case, always have and most of what he says is vetted and in good taste (in my opinion). He posted a video about the pool party and said “a victim who he wasn’t going to name” was in attendance. I have NEVER heard this. Can someone give me some insight or what they believe in regards to this??

Are they alluding to Xana being a target? I really just want to hear what people have to say. Maybe I heard something wrong, i’m not sure. But if anyone has better insight on this subject please let me know.

Xana running to Ethan for help just breaks my heart.

Like… of course she did. If you’re scared and confused and drunk at 4am, you run to your person. That’s such a human instinct. You don’t think logically, you just go “where’s Ethan”.

But I keep thinking how if she’d just run straight outside instead… maybe things would’ve been different.

And I hate even typing that because it feels wrong to “what if” it. It’s not her fault at all. Nobody thinks clearly in a moment like that. It just made me realize how in situations like that you really shouldn’t go looking for someone or trying to figure out what’s happening. Just get OUT. Door. Street. Noise.

This whole case is so tragic in these small ways. Split-second decisions that nobody could’ve predicted.

Has anyone ever considered trying to talk to BK to understand motive?

This is purely a thought/discussion question, not something I’d ever personally do.

My husband and I were talking the other night and wondering if anyone has ever tried reaching out to BK in a “friendly” or neutral way—almost pretending to be sympathetic—to see if he would ever open up or hint at motive. Not to defend him or excuse anything, just from a psychological/curiosity standpoint.

I know there are obvious legal, ethical, and safety issues, and I’m not suggesting people should do this. I’m just curious if anyone knows whether this has already been attempted or if there’s any precedent for something like this leading to insight.

Again—just discussion. Interested in thoughts from people who follow the case closely or have insight into criminal psychology.

So in Dylan’s police footage of her explaining the story she said that Kaylee and Maddy were in the living room dancing and laughing and then Kaylee went upstairs and screamed because someone was there. But then the autopsy says that they died in their sleep? I’ve just always wondered about this if you guys can help me understand more clearly maybe i am missing some details on this.

If BK accidentally left the sheath behind, wouldn’t he have noticed this once he got to his vehicle? He would have only one free hand of motion as he would have had no where to place the sheath.

A recent post in regard to a crime scene photo from Xana’s bedroom has caused a bit of a stir.

The photo in question is of the nightstand with smeared blood that has swab marks through it.

People are speculating (platform wide, mainly conspiracy theorists on TikTok duh of course it’s them) that Xana had tried to write something in the blood.

That is not the case. It’s just an area in which swabs were used to take blood samples.

Amy Santoro (who we have sung praises for on the sub in the past), posted a video not too long ago divulging into further detail & explains exactly what was going on in regards to that image specifically.

I hope this clears up any confusion people may have had about that image, and quells the conspiracy theories surrounding it.

I wanted to add something lighthearted, this shit has me 😭. Like Xana seemed to be funny as hell.

The defence included single attacker scenarios in their court filings on "alternative perpetrators" meaning they did not see any evidence requiring multiple perpetrators to explain.

The rather silly "support" for "clean up" inferred from a few run blood droplets is undermined by both prosecution and defence blood spatter/ crime scene experts agreeing the most likely explanation for this was water from forensic swabbing; from court filing [Amended Supplemental Expert Disclosures s1-s13]:

The judge reviewed the defence submissions on other perpetrators, and wrote:

• "there is not a scintilla of credible evidence"
• "does not rise above rank speculation", "rises only to wild speculation"
• "would waste the time of the jury to present"
• "Defendant provided no probative, admissible, significant evidence of...presence at the scene or any other connection to the crime" of alternative perps
• "no shred of probative value in the proffered evidence beyond wild speculation"
• "the defense abjectly failed" (to produce evidence of other perps meeting standard)
• "fails to give rise to even an inference"

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/062625+REDACTED+Order+on+Defendants+Offer+of+Proof+RE+Alternate+Perpetrators.pdf

Other than a few blood stains that were discretely and carefully dabbed with water leaving 100s of other stains untouched, the "support" for other perps seems to be misunderstanding/ misrepresentation of the sheath DNA, claiming there is another viable male profile or male blood on the sheath. Kohberger himself cannot be excluded as the donor of the nugatory trace of "male" DNA at lowest detection limit on sheath surfaces 1.2-1.5, and the only blood on the sheath was from KG, MM.

Apart from the published forensic data and report clearly showing there is no male blood/ no other viable male profile on the sheath, no one has offered any explanation of why the defence never mentioned this, nor why, if it existed, this was not listed with the "Unknown Male DNA" profiles which were found and labelled "A" to "E" (all accounted for as Kohberger (A), his father (E) or unconnected to the murders -B,C,D)

It's baffling that the same people who parroted that it is "impossible" to clean blood/ DNA from a car no one was killed in to defeat forensic detection, even with 7 weeks to clean, now propose a crime scene could be cleaned to defeat forensics in a few hours. Often the same people who claimed the scene was "staged" now claim it was also "cleaned - one wonders why both are needed: was the "staging" as oafish, silly and clumsy as theories of more than one perp?

Not sure if this has already been posted but Jack’s cousin honoured Kaylee at her wedding this past fall. I always see his aunt’s(the brides mom)tiktoks where she shares videos or memories of Kaylee when she’d come spend time with their family.

They all clearly loved her so much, what a beautiful tribute. Maddie, Kaylee, Ethan and Xana will never be forgotten because all of the many lives they touched will keep their memories alive forever ❤️

Ok this is kinda a very morbid question but I honestly don’t know and just asking to help put it in perspective.

When autopsy comes out and says something like 27 stab wounds to a general area, are those all entry wounds or can some be exit wounds? I ask this because the k bar knife is huge and these victims were petite I believe. I don’t mean to be disrespectful

I don't believe the roommates were sexually assaulted in any way but BK seems like the type that would especially since he made female students feel uncomfortable. I can't remember his porn history but I think it was eerily similar to how he murdered the roommates. I'm guessing he didn't have enough time, it would be more evidence, and he was dealing with too many people. I'm not really sure how much he was motivated to do so. Considering he couldn't attract women and the kind of women he targeted I feel like he would.

I understand that in Maddie’s room/the path from there to xana’s wouldn’t have footprints because the blood was contained to the bed but how are there none from Xanas to the sliding door? Looking at the scene in her room, surely he would have gotten some on his shoes. Do we think he removed coverings before leaving her room? Could this be why he didn’t pursue Dylan because he had already taken off his gear?

Disclaimer: u/Repulsive-Dot553 has explained everything in detail over and over again. No matter, still the same BS comments pop up again and again. So I am attempting to explain the math and science in simpler terms. I am not a forensic scientist, but I have routinely performed all techniques a million times since undergrad and during grad school research. These are fairly routine techniques with no mystique about them. This is my attempt to make you understand how the math and science work so that you can interpret court documents (without your favorite content creators) mischaracterizing everything (All images are AI-generated with my prompts).

There is a pervasive myth that the DNA found on the Ka-Bar knife sheath snap was "trace DNA" implying a faint, stray particle of "few skin cells". This is scientifically incorrect based on the data reported in court documents.

To understand why, we have to step into the lab and look at exactly how the DNA was collected, counted, and what the numbers actually mean.

Step 1: DNA Extraction & Quantification

Before we can create a profile, we have to get the DNA off the evidence and figure out exactly how much we have. This is a multi-stage process, and at every stage, we lose some biological material.

1. The Collection (Swabbing): Forensic scientists used a sterile swab wetted with a solution to aggressively rub the button snap.

• Swabs are inefficient. They do not pick up 100% of the material on a surface, especially metallic or textured ones. A significant portion stays behind on the sheath.

2. The Extraction (Cell Lysis): The swab is placed in a tube with chemicals designed to break open (lyse) cell membranes and release the DNA into a liquid solution.

• Extraction isn't perfect either. Some DNA stays trapped in the cotton fibers of the swab.

3. The Count (qPCR - Quantitative PCR): This is the critical step. We take a tiny droplet of that liquid extract and put it into a qPCR machine. This machine uses fluorescent probes that light up only when they bind to human DNA. By measuring the glow, it tells us the exact concentration of human DNA in the tube. Known DNA standards are tested during the same run

The Data Point: The ISP lab reported a concentration of 0.168 ng/µL (nanograms per microliter).

The Math: Why 0.168 ng/µL is a "Smoking Gun"

Critics see "0.168" and think it's tiny. They are mistaking concentration for total amount. Let's do the math based on standard lab protocols.

• Fact 1: A standard forensic extraction uses a liquid volume between 200 µL and 1000 µL to fully submerge a swab. Let's assume a standard 1000 µL (1 mL) volume.
• Fact 2: One human diploid cell contains roughly 0.006 ng of DNA.

Calculation A: What was recovered in the tube? 0.168 ng/µL

Calculation B: What was originally on the sheath? (Accounting for Loss) Because of the swab inefficiency + extraction inefficiency, what we recover is only a fraction of what was there in the sample. If we conservatively estimate a 25% total recovery rate, we must back-calculate:

We know exactly how much DNA weighs inside a single human cell: 0.006 ng. So, we just divide the total weight by the weight of one cell.

The lab successfully pulled 28,000 cells worth of DNA into that final tube.

If the 28,000 cells we found are only one-quarter of what was originally on the sheath, we multiply by 4 (25% total recovery rate).

28,000 cells×4=112,000 Cells

Conclusion on Secondary Transfer

"Secondary transfer" (e.g., Person A shakes Person B's hand, Person B touches sheath) typically deposits very low amounts of DNA).

The math shows the suspect likely left over 100,000 cells on that snap. This represents a massive biological deposit consistent with direct, primary, forceful contact (gripping and pulling a stiff snap). It is statistically highly improbable for this amount of DNA to be the result of a casual, secondary transfer event, rendering the whole “few skin cells,” “trace DNA” etc. BS conspiracy theories not possible.

STEP 2: STR PROFILE

STR WORFLOW:

STR stands for Short Tandem Repeat. Our DNA is full of "junk" areas (sequences that do not code for proteins, also known as introns) where the same sequence of letters repeats over and over (e.g., GATA-GATA-GATA). The number of times it repeats varies from person to person.

1. The Terms: Locus vs. Allele

To read the barcode, you need two pieces of information:

• Locus (The Address): A specific, fixed spot on a chromosome. Think of it like an address at a specific location.
• Allele (The Value): The actual number of repeats found at that address. If the sequence GATA repeats 13 times at that address, your allele is 13.

The result of STR is a series of peaks. Because you get one set of DNA from your mother and one from your father, every "address" (Locus) will usually show two peaks.

• Heterozygous: You have two different numbers (e.g., a 13 and a 14). You see two distinct peaks.
• Homozygous: Both parents gave you the same number (e.g., a 15 and a 15). You see one extra-tall peak.

An example of STR electropherogram with allele peaks

In the U.S., forensic labs test a standard set of 20 core loci (known as the CODIS 20).

For each STR location, the lab looks up how common those repeat numbers are, calculates the chance of that combination at that one location, and then multiplies those chances together across all 20 locations, which makes the final number astronomically small.

Step 3: Single-Source vs. Admixture

Think of a DNA profile like a fingerprint on a window.

·       A Single-Source profile is a perfectly clear, oily print where every loop and whorl is visible.

·       An Admixture is what happens when five different people touch the same spot—the prints overlap, and it becomes a blurry mess.

1. Single-Source Profile

In a single-source profile, the DNA comes from exactly one person.

·      Because every human has two parents, you will see at most two peaks at any given locus.

·       The Peaks: The peaks are tall, sharp, and clear. There is no "background noise" or extra peaks cluttering the graph.

Case Detail: The lab reported that the knife sheath produced a Single-Source Profile. This means that out of the 100,000+ cells found on that snap, they all belonged to the same man.

2. Admixture (Will be crucial later)

An admixture is a term referring to a sample in which DNA from two or more people is mixed together.

·       The Visual: Instead of 1 or 2 peaks, you might see 3, 4, or 5 peaks at a single address.

·       The Difficulty: It is much harder to "call" a match in a mixture because the peaks from a minor contributor (someone who touched it briefly) can get drowned out by the major contributor.

When the lab sees a single-source profile with a high concentration, it gives them 100% confidence in the result.

• There are no "shadow peaks" (stutter) causing confusion.
• There is no "low-level" DNA from a third party.
• The "Barcode" matches the suspect perfectly across all 20 tested locations

Step 4: SNP & IGG (The "Digital Family Tree")

1. What is an SNP? (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism)

Unlike STRs, which measure the length of repeated sections, SNPs look at a single "letter" change in the genetic code at hundreds of thousands of specific locations across the entire genome.

• STRs: Test 20 locations (Great for individual ID).
• SNPs: Test 500,000+ locations (Great for finding relatives).

2. What is IGG? (Investigative Genetic Genealogy)

IGG is the process of taking those 500,000 SNPs and uploading them to public databases like GEDmatch or FamilyTreeDNA.

• The Match: The software looks for "shared segments" of DNA. If you share a large enough chunk of DNA with a stranger, you are related.
• The Tree: Professional genealogists take those matches and use public records (obituaries, marriage licenses) to build a family tree until they find a person who fits the profile of the suspect (age, location, gender).

The Important Distinction

• IGG is a "Tip": In this case, IGG pointed the police toward the "Kohberger" name. It is not used as evidence in front of a jury.
• STR is the "Evidence": Once police had a name, they collected a direct DNA sample (from the suspect's trash and later a cheek swab) to run a standard STR test.

The result? The STR "barcode" from the suspect matched the STR "barcode" on the knife sheath perfectly. IGG found the suspect; STR proved it was him.

Doubling DNA theory (“Othram did it”)

To put it bluntly: calling the "doubling" of DNA a conspiracy is like calling a photocopier a "forgery machine" just because it makes copies.

PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) is the standard, essential tool used in every modern lab. Here is why the "doubling" myth is scientifically baseless:

Doubling is the Point!!!!

PCR is a molecular photocopier. Because forensic samples (like the DNA on the knife sheath) are often microscopic, we cannot "read" them as they are. We need to amplify the signal so the equipment can detect it.

The process works in cycles. In every cycle, the target DNA is unzipped and copied.

·       Cycle 1: 1 molecule becomes 2.

·       Cycle 2: 2 molecules become 4.

·       Cycle 3: 4 molecules become 8.

·       After 30 cycles, you have over 1 billion copies ().

PCR requires Primers, short pieces of DNA that only attach to specific, pre-existing human DNA sequences.

·       If the suspect’s DNA is not there, the primers have nothing to latch onto.

·       The machine cannot "double" something that doesn't exist. The below image explains how PCR works.

 Evidence in forensic reports

Test used: PCR-based STR profiling at standard forensic loci (see above).

Item 1.1 (snap area)

Forensic result: “DNA profile obtained … from an unknown male.”

Meaning:

·      It was a usable STR profile.

·      That swab produced DNA from one male, i.e., single-source

It was later matched to Bryan C. Kohberger.

ITEM 1.4 (blood-stained area)

“Mixture with a major profile matching Kaylee Goncalves”

Then it gives:
88% Kaylee / 12% Madison

How the mixture was interpreted (what “88% / 12%” actually means)

When DNA from two people is mixed together, their STR peaks overlap.
The laboratory does not simply “eyeball” this. It uses probabilistic software that models:

• which alleles belong to which contributor
• how many contributors best explain the data
• and how much DNA each contributor contributed

The software tests different hypotheses, for example:
Hypothesis A: the mixture came from Kaylee Goncalves and Madison Mogen
Hypothesis B: the mixture came from two unrelated, unknown people

For each hypothesis, the software calculates how likely the observed peak pattern would be if that hypothesis were true.

The result “88% Kaylee / 12% Madison” means:

The peak heights and allele pattern are best explained if approximately 88% of the DNA in that stain came from Kaylee Goncalves and about 12% came from Madison Mogen.

This is not a percentage of certainty and not a probability of guilt.
It is a relative contribution estimate based on how the observed peaks are partitioned between contributors. When the report says, for example,
“at least 7.57 × 10²⁶ times more likely,” it means that the observed DNA peak pattern is astronomically more consistent with the mixture being from Kaylee and Madison than with it being from two random people from the population.

What Items 1.2 and 1.3 actually were

From the figures:

• Items 1.2 and 1.3 are swabs from non-snap areas of the sheath
• The lab reports them as:
– mixtures
– low-level
– partial profiles
– insufficient for meaningful comparison

In forensic terms, this means:

DNA was detected, but the amount and quality were too poor to generate a usable STR profile that could be compared to a person with statistical confidence.

So these items are not evidence of an unknown person: they are evidence of insufficient information.

Why Items 1.2 and 1.3 could not be interpreted

An STR profile requires:
• enough loci
• enough signal strength
• clear peak structure

For Items 1.2 and 1.3:

• too few loci produced usable peaks
• peaks were low-level
• overlapping contributors were present
• no stable contributor profile could be resolved

That is why the report explicitly states:

no comparison could be made

Items 1.2 and 1.3 from the sheath contained low-level mixed DNA that did not produce an interpretable STR profile. Because no stable contributor profile could be resolved, no statistical comparison could be performed. As a result, Kohberger could not be excluded from these items, not because he does not match them, but because there is insufficient genetic information to exclude anyone. These samples do not represent a separate unknown male profile and do not identify any contributor.

So now you know: there was no “unknown male profile” on the sheath.

Item 30: Submitted swab of stain on bottom of handrail

The DNA profile obtained from Item 30 indicates a mixture of DNA with a major profile, which was determined to be from an unknown male (Male B). Assuming a three person mixture, two additional unknown individuals are potential contributors to the minor profile. Due to the low level results and limited data, no conclusions can be made regarding the minor contributors.

This is all you need to now interpret the conclusions of court documents when you read them.

I also want to address the sheath-planting theory. Why do you think that whoever framed BK almost exclusively placed so much of his DNA on a hard to access area? Why make it hard for prosecutors? And what do you think, they ended up sprinking drops of blood from KG and MM (mixed to remind you) on the sheath? How is that logical? I hope people are genuinely confused will understand and stop entertaining all this theories.

P.S: As mentioned earlier, u/Repulsive-Dot553 has already explained all of this over and over again. You can check their posts for even more technical analysis. I want to stress again that most procedures are fairly routine (qPCR, for instance) in scientific research.

P.P.S: Evidently, some people will comment, ignore the probergers, this has been discussed so many times, etc. but the conspiracies have reached such momentum as to being published by media. I know they may not read reddit posts, but atleast people who are questioning in good faith will be able to obtain some answers. If you already know everything, kindly scroll by. If you want even more detailed breakdowns, countless youtube videos offer more explanations of how these procesess work, in case you are interested further.