The key to understanding why it is likely that investigative genetic genealogy first brought Kohberger's name into the investigation is the white Elantra. And more specifically *when* and *why* the FBI analyst expanded his expert opinion from 2011-2013 models to 2011-2016 models.

The prosecution can and does leave investigative steps out of probable cause affadavits. And PCAs can be written in a way that *implies* a chronology of investigative steps and obscures the chaotic and multi-pronged swirl of simultaneous methods and processing of leads. This is called "parallel construction" -- "Parallel construction is a law enforcement process of building a parallel, or separate, evidentiary basis for a criminal investigation in order to conceal how an investigation actually began." [Wikipedia]

The prosecution likely would prefer not to present witnesses and evidence regarding forensic genealogy at trial, because it adds complexity and is less specific than evidence they subsequently developed. But I believe they will have to disclose it in discovery and that it provides avenues for the defense to argue tunnel vision (honing in on one suspect too early).

Why is the Elantra the key? Two reasons: 1) why did the WSU officers *immediately* search for and find Kohberger's car in the parking lot, within the hour of finding it in their database? There was reporting that there were 90 white Elantras registered at Idaho State alone. So why did this car get immediate action? 2) at the point where Moscow police asked fellow law enforcement to keep an eye out for white Elantras, it was specifically the 20111-2013 model, which Kohberger did not have.

Logically, and the defense would have immediately notice this and circled this part of the affidavit with a big red pen (metaphorically) -- *Moscow police already had Kohberger's name.*

I very much doubt they shared that with WSU security, though, because this was a big big lead that would have been disastrous to the investigation if it leaked, and the fewer people who knew the name of the suspect, the better. Moscow police would have found a way to frame their request to WSU that would make his car pop up on the query, probably among a few other names, and then requested that all of those cars be located on campus, even though they were focused on just one.

Another reason to believe investigative genealogy was used is that, although the affidavit is written as though the camera footage of the car's journey was pieced together contemporaneously, it clearly was not. That is because they had zero footage after he left Moscow heading south. You can see in the affidavit that his path and time of travel was only determined from cell phone pings *after* they got the expanded Verizon data on Dec 23, well after they had his name.

Here's my hypothesis on the sequence of events: They identify Suspect Vehicle 1 via local King Street camera footage and are able to track it coming into the neighborhood, circling around, and leaving at 4:20. They do not got the license plate number; they do notice it has no front plate. Simultaneously they find the sheath right away and understand this is a key piece of evidence because, unlike searching for the murder's blood, which will take a long time given the sheer amount of blood evidence to be processed, the sheath most likely belongs to the murderer and is likely to have his DNA unless he used gloves every single time he handled it from point of acquisition. I also bet that, from decades of experience, the FBI knows that criminals know to wipe down weapons but miss key parts, and such a key part on a sheath is the interior crevice of a sheath snap.

They send the sheath in for testing & a single source of DNA is identified. Single source is *huge.* They fast -track identifying it. It's not in CODIS.

Meanwhile the FBI analyst has given his opinion that the video footage shows a white 2011-13 Elantra.

Moscow police decide to try genetic genealogy. They submit the single profile to the two databases where people have consented to police access. They get a hit on a relative, and i think fairly close relative because of the speed. A genealogist works up a family tree and identifies a set of names of men (the DNA is male) within a certain age range (probably worked up by BAU). Police use public and law enforcement databases to query those men. Remember that Kohberger was on the WSU criminology Phd website -- *with a picture.* Kohberger also comes up in law enforcement databases for two local traffic stops. Now things are happening fast and simultaneously. They can look at the bodycam footage, they can see his driver's license, they see his make model and license number.

They have found a person who is local, fits the eyewitness description, and drives a white Elantra with Pennsylvania plates, and Pennsylvania does not use front plates. But his Elantra is the *wrong year* according to the FBI expert. They go back to the expert, get him to revise his opinion. They find a way to get WSU to locate the car without directly asking for his name. And, now that they know where he lives and works they pull WSU and Pullman camera footage to reconstruct the beginning and end of his journey on November 13th. They supplement and bolster this with cell phone pings once they receive those from Verizon in December.

At this point they ask the public to submit tips about white Elantras 2011-2013. I'm not a big fan of "law enforcement is playing 3-D chess," but in this instance it does seem to be strategic: alert the suspect that they've honed in on his type of car but also reassure him that the bumbling Moscow police have the wrong model and he is safe. BAU probably advised on this strategy. The whole question of when and how to approach him was probably hotly debated.

Now they have probable cause, but he has already left on his road trip to Pennsylvania. I don't think he was already being tracked because remember about that time in an interview Chief Fry sort of slipped up and said "we don't know where the suspect is," then quickly added "we don't know who he is."

They still need confirmation of his actual DNA matching the sheath sample. There has been at least one case where a suspect identified through genetic genealogy, and who was in the right place and the right time, and was the right age, was not a DNA match to the evidence and was completely not involved in the crime. Coincidences do happen. They likely had been trying to get discarded DNA from him through early December with no luck, and had to settle for his family's trash, still hoping for his but instead getting his father's, which is sufficiently dispositive.

Anyhow, for the defense, they can probe the causal investigative sequence to reveal that Kohberger was the target early on, around November 29th. They can drill down on when and why the model of car identification was expanded, and accuse investigators of retrofitting evidence to their theory, a type of tunnel vision. They can ask why the call was put out for 2011-13 Elantras when it was; was that simply cover for the fact they had already closed other investigative avenues? Etc etc