Bryan Kohberger adds new lawyer ahead of murder trial: Who is Bicka Barlow?

Bryan Kohberger, the suspect in the tragic 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students, has bolstered his legal defense team by adding a renowned DNA forensic expert, Bicka Barlow, as he faces capital murder charges that could result in the death penalty. Barlow, a San Francisco-based attorney with deep expertise in DNA evidence, has been granted permission by the court to join Kohberger’s defense team despite being licensed in California. Her involvement underscores the critical role DNA evidence is expected to play in the high-stakes case. Barlow’s addition to the team comes as Kohberger’s trial approaches, with proceedings set to begin in August and potentially lasting up to 15 weeks.

Barlow’s credentials make her a significant asset to Kohberger’s defense. She holds a bachelor’s degree in genetics from the University of California, Berkeley, a master’s degree from Cornell University, and a law degree from the University of San Francisco School of Law. Her career began as a researching attorney in the criminal division of the San Francisco Superior Court, and she later founded a private practice specializing in DNA-related cases. Notably, Barlow claims to have successfully challenged the admissibility of short tandem repeat (STR) DNA evidence in court, a landmark achievement in the field of forensic science. Her expertise also extends to mitochondrial DNA and Y-STR testing, which focuses on DNA found in the Y chromosome. Barlow’s involvement suggests that the defense is preparing to scrutinize the DNA evidence used to link Kohberger to the crime, potentially challenging its reliability or interpretation.

The legal team adjustments also include changes to Kohberger’s defense structure. Jay Logsdon, who previously served as a deputy to lead attorney Anne Taylor, will transition to a consultant role and will not represent Kohberger during the trial. This reshuffling highlights the complexities and strategic considerations involved in building a defense against such severe charges. Meanwhile, Judge Steven Hippler of Ada County has approved Barlow’s pro hac vice admission, allowing her to practice in Idaho for this specific case despite being licensed in California. Her participation marks a significant shift in the defense strategy, signaling a focus on contesting the forensic evidence central to the prosecution’s case.

DNA evidence has been a pivotal factor in identifying Kohberger as the suspect in the murders of Madison Mogen, 21, Kaylee Goncalves, 21, Xana Kernodle, 20, and Ethan Chapin, 20. Investigators recovered a knife sheath from under Mogen’s remains, which carried DNA on the snap. This evidence, along with other forensic findings, led authorities to Kohberger, a Ph.D. student in criminology at Washington State University at the time of his arrest. The DNA evidence was critical in establishing probable cause for his arrest, and its admissibility and interpretation will likely be a focal point of the trial.

However, the defense has raised concerns about the methods used to obtain this evidence. During a recently unsealed closed-door hearing, Detective Brett Payne of the Moscow Police Department testified that Kohberger’s name was unknown to investigators until December 19, 2022, when it was provided by the FBI through a genetic genealogy investigation. This technique involves comparing DNA evidence from the crime scene with public genealogy databases to identify potential suspects. However, defense witness Dr. Leah Larkin testified that the FBI’s use of at least two such databases violated an internal policy, as the agency was not supposed to access these databases for investigative purposes. Despite this, Judge Hippler ruled that the FBI’s actions did not violate the Constitution or undermine the probable cause for Kohberger’s arrest, ensuring that the DNA evidence will remain part of the case.

As the trial approaches, the stakes are high for both the prosecution and the defense. If convicted, Kohberger could face the death penalty, making this one of the most consequential capital murder cases in recent Idaho history. The defense’s decision to bring in Barlow suggests a strategic effort to challenge the forensic evidence, potentially raising doubts about its reliability or the methods used to obtain it. With the trial expected to last up to 15 weeks, the case will undoubtedly draw widespread attention, both for its legal complexities and the profound impact it has had on the victims’ families and the Moscow community. The involvement of experts like Barlow highlights the meticulous preparation both sides are undertaking as they prepare to present their arguments in court. Ultimately, the case will hinge on the strength of the evidence and the effectiveness of the strategies employed by both the prosecution and the defense.