Continuation Part Eight: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[anglolawyer]

(First off, Dr Waterbury has a detailed review of the forensics in his book, "The Framing of Amanda Knox". Trying to read through it now, maybe I'll find some help. But much appreciation to the DNA experts here for helpiong to sort through.)

It's a fair point to be cautious about accusing people of dishonesty. In fairness though, she did commit perjury on the witness stand; when she said she hadn't run blood tests on footprints revealed by luminol, when in fact she had and the tests were negative.

Also, she is on the crime scene video from the first day asking urgently about getting a 'presumable semen' stain tested (MMK.com), and that tested stain never surfaced.
The result of Meredith's DNA on the blade may have been a lucky accident. But look at the pressure she was under to find a match, to provide some evidence in support of the prosecution's claims. She just happens to match Raf to the Bra strap, and Meredith to a knife that Amanda had used (did they know she used that knife?).

Getting a 'hole in one' is one thing. Doing it blindfolded is something else entirely.

When you go to a kids magic show, or even David Copperfield, you can be amazed at the tricks, but you're aware that they're tricks. Magic isn't real. Stefanoni's results seem too good to be true, at least for the prosecution. They haven't done anything honest from the beginning. Doesn't prove guilty of tampering, but these people are playing it straight.

I don't think outright planted (because the presentation of the findings would be stronger if they were actively planted) but something in the neighborhood.

Let's not get carried away. She took a vaginal swab and may well have 'presumed' it to contain semen as she presumed other things to consist of blood. That does not mean she has a result she suppressed.

 

[Grinder]

Let's not get carried away. She took a vaginal swab and may well have 'presumed' it to contain semen as she presumed other things to consist of blood. That does not mean she has a result she suppressed.

Is this a Grinder sock puppet?

 

[acbytesla]

I would bet that if Meredith wasn't attacked immediately she would have tossed the book on the bed and laid down to digest and maybe catch 40 winks. It was not freezing but cool and her dress was not heavy and was loose fitting. Rudi's words are not evidence.

I did discuss why he might give the wrong time for the scream. One reason is that he didn't know the time which is almost 100% certain for obvious reasons. The second reason just given to you is that he wanted the story to fit with Amanda's story. He had read that she arranged to meet Patrick in her text sent before 9 and they met at the plaza and she took him to the cottage and he raped and killed Meredith and she screamed. He figured that was about 9:20-30.

When did he say he arrived at the cottage?

Why does he have a need to coordinate the time with Amanda Knox? This makes no sense at all Grinder. and I don't agree that he didn't know the time..and I see no obvious reasons for that. Remember he said that Amanda WASN'T there.

 

[acbytesla]

I would bet that if Meredith wasn't attacked immediately she would have tossed the book on the bed and laid down to digest and maybe catch 40 winks. It was not freezing but cool and her dress was not heavy and was loose fitting. Rudi's words are not evidence.

I did discuss why he might give the wrong time for the scream. One reason is that he didn't know the time which is almost 100% certain for obvious reasons. The second reason just given to you is that he wanted the story to fit with Amanda's story. He had read that she arranged to meet Patrick in her text sent before 9 and they met at the plaza and she took him to the cottage and he raped and killed Meredith and she screamed. He figured that was about 9:20-30.

When did he say he arrived at the cottage?

Why does he have a need to coordinate the time with Amanda Knox? This makes no sense at all Grinder. and I don't agree that he didn't know the time..and I see no obvious reasons for that. Remember he said that Amanda WASN'T there.

DELETE

 

[Grinder]

Why does he have a need to coordinate the time with Amanda Knox? This makes no sense at all Grinder. and I don't agree that he didn't know the time..and I see no obvious reasons for that. Remember he said that Amanda WASN'T there.

Tesla you say the time is correct because he would want to line up with the correct time. I don't see why he would care but fine. I say it is just as likely that he was just fitting his story to Amanda's which was well published by that time. You don't agree that he didn't know the time based on what? I say he didn't have a watch or a phone and that he had no reason to look at a time piece when she screamed or for that matter ever during this murder.

I asked you what other times he provided, such as when he arrived and when Meredith let him in etc.

I know he said she wasn't there at one point during the first Skype.

Here he says in the Skype - Umm, she was game [c’è stata] and so was I. So, we see each other... So we went in, and I think it was about eight‐thirty, or eight‐twenty, they're saying that she told her friends she was tired and wanted to go home. But in fact no, we were supposed to see each other, we had made an appointment the evening before during the Halloween party, at the Spanish kids' house, and I can also say, well I don't know the street but I can say where it was

So do you believe that they went in at 8:20 or 8:30? Of course you don't because Meredith didn't return until 9. Why would he lie about that time? Any chance he had no clue what time it was when he arrived or when she screamed?

ETA - so if he thinks she returned at 8:30 which really was 9 then 9:20-30 becomes 9:50 -10:00 which is the correct TOD.

 

[RandyN]

Without any knowledge of DNA at all the knife stinks. It's selection is suspect and the testing equally so. What are the odds? Stefanoni's known results, which she suppressed and lied about (is that a clue, do you think?) justified her tossing the knife away as meaningless. We are asked to believe her intuition, on top of the cop's, led her to this non-repeatable, decisive result. And that's without the bra clasp panto. It's no surprise when the big picture reeks that the details should fail to reassure.

Now this is spot on Anglo!


Excusing Stefanoni as possibly making a mistake or ten is not looking deep enough IMO.

Here are additional problems....

Forgetting to run the proper controls maybe be excusable, except that the testing she was attempting was not then and is not now something that she is qualified, equipped or took any reasonably agreed upon special handling procedures that can assure meeting any standard agreed upon in the science.

In addition to those failures she went completely beyond the safety margins of both machine and test kit design of the manufacturer.

And so a debate that is limited to only the controls is giving a sort of legitimacy to her incorrect overall methods...and those methods deserve no such consideration. They are faulty, scientifically wrong conclusions made up with methods unsupported by any real (honest) scientists in the field. The fake science needs to be called out for the sloppy mistake ridden mess that it actual is.

That fact that she can get Biondo and Novelli to go into court and confirm her method is not only suspect but that those methods have already been discounted by a rather large group of letter signing experts as well as two highly qualified, independently court assigned experts...one at least who is a fully trained pathologist...not just a 4 year degree lab tech.

As Anglo so beautifully points out...if it were a simple matter of a mistake or two then why all the suspicious withholding, backpedaling, obfuscation, lies, and returns to the crime scene?

Stefanonis rush to move up, test and review the reference samples is alone enough to discredit her. Real scientists avoid the inherent problem that subconscious confirmation may happen and so the standard is to avoid doing that. Stefanoni OTOH jumps the queue in order to do this exact thing.

Also, it is not correct and not standard for the head of the collection to also be involved in the lab work and interpretation of those findings. Let alone to be involved in the prosecution and police strategy meetings...it reeks of conflict of interest if not outright corruption !

There was a DNA expert here...Tom something...perhaps he is only at IIP? I don't recall now...but he works in this business daily and would have valuable input. Anyone else recall him?

 

[RandyN]

It is a pity that Amanda and Raf weren't quizzed at their first hearing after being arrested as to their knowledge of destroying DNA with bleach. Had they acknowledged this knowledge which can be 100% implied by the MySpace picture of Raf with the cleaver and bottle, then it is 100% certain they would have cleaned the knife in bleach. My micro biologist buddy says that in household bleach destruction would take a little time. The defense should contend that the smell of bleach indicates the kids cleaned the knife with the substance and therefore the DNA found has to be contamination.

This I believe would resonate with the Italian mind.

OH dear ...now we are going to have a "time to dissolve DNA in bleach of different concentrations" argument much like Grinders endless and pointless "digestion data".

OK lets have your cites that the knife washed in household bleach can retain detectable DNA...and how long does it take to actually destroy the DNA? For crists sakes........while you're at it why not re-throw-up the diluted enough bloody footprints that react to luminol and yet test TMB negative?

A lot of what you speculate is sub-fractional nonsense not all that different to the BS arguments Yummi attempts to make here.

Dozens of scientists have already far exceeded necessary efforts that discrediting of Stefanonis DNA work especially as it relates to LTN/LCN DNA requires.

That the defense cant get those critical facts across to the Italian courts will not be aided by a paper from a web forum ...especially one that has Big Foot as an important topic.

The press needs to investigate and report just these few important facts. The LTN/LCN DNA can never and should never be allowed into this court. And to do so anyway or to ignore the experts findings about these UN-certified tests is proof of a judicial mistake. A unfair trial.

The 48 Hours and Dateline and CNN shows are too broad and the average citizen cant see the forest thru the trees as it were. Pick five major defects and do a BBC ch 5? story only do it properly...not half azzed.

I see today that the Kerchers are calling on the USA to follow the law and allow the easy extradition of Miss Knox. Let me guess...they don't get any money until the defendants are back in jail? I think I have seen enough from these people. They cant be this stupid. They dishonor the memory of their daughter by being incredibly simple and vindictive IMHO.

 

[Grinder]

OH dear ...now we are going to have a "time to dissolve DNA in bleach of different concentrations" argument much like Grinders endless and pointless "digestion data".

It's not my data - contentions are made that can't be backed up.

OK lets have your cites that the knife washed in household bleach can retain detectable DNA...and how long does it take to actually destroy the DNA? For crists sakes........while you're at it why not re-throw-up the diluted enough bloody footprints that react to luminol and yet test TMB negative?

Why not Randy? It has been shown that it is possible for Luminol to light up from a more diluted mixture than TMB can pick up and that adds another possible connection which means it has less gravity under Italian law. The point wasn't that bleach doesn't destroy DNA but that it takes a little time. The greater point that may have eluded you is that if Amanda knew about bleach and DNA it could be used Italian style as defense. She knew about bleach destroying DNA, they had bleach therefore it probable they used it and destroyed any DNA so the DNA must be from contamination.

Dozens of scientists have already far exceeded necessary efforts that discrediting of Stefanonis DNA work especially as it relates to LTN/LCN DNA requires.

I think you see too much red to be able to read accurately.

That the defense cant get those critical facts across to the Italian courts will not be aided by a paper from a web forum ...especially one that has Big Foot as an important topic.]/quote]

Are you working on a Big Foot article, that's nice.

I see today that the Kerchers are calling on the USA to follow the law and allow the easy extradition of Miss Knox. Let me guess...they don't get any money until the defendants are back in jail? I think I have seen enough from these people. They cant be this stupid. They dishonor the memory of their daughter by being incredibly simple and vindictive IMHO.

You should get right on it.

 

[carbonjam72]

Stefanoni on crime scene tape requesting test result for "presumably semen"

Also, she is on the crime scene video from the first day asking urgently about getting a 'presumable semen' stain tested (MMK.com), and that tested stain never surfaced.

Let's not get carried away. She took a vaginal swab and may well have 'presumed' it to contain semen as she presumed other things to consist of blood. That does not mean she has a result she suppressed.

This is from a video clip on the MurderofMerdithKercher.com site. Its where the detective are going around to the bottom of the house, Stefanoni is outside talking into her cell phone, and there is a translation offered of what she's saying. She talking about a stain ample and actually says, "presumably semen".

Here's the link and a quote above the clip:

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/failed-sexual-assault-investigation/

From MMK.com

"Missing Sperm-Specific Analyses

The laboratory records also reveal that both of the “sperm fractions,” i.e., the subtraces that were supposed to contain only sperm, tested positive for human DNA. Although the amounts of detected DNA were relatively small (1200 and 700 picograms, respectively), the quantities were well within the parameters that the lab was using to determine whether to further analyze the samples. Indeed, discernable gaps in the lab records suggest that these DNA-positive sperm fractions were in fact subjected to genetic profiling as profile nos. 626 and 628. However, no amplification or electrophoresis records corresponding to profile nos. 626 and 628 were ever disclosed by the prosecution. As shown in the video below, crime scene investigator/lab technician Patrizia Stefanoni can be heard on November 3 telling her assistant of an urgent need to test “presumed seminal fluid”. They knew the perpetrator had ejaculated. Stefanoni would later claim testing the stain would compromise the shoe print evidence."

 

[Planigale]

There is a comment in the first ISC appeal where the prosecutor says that accepting the findings of the defence might invalidate the use of DNA more broadly. I suspect that this may be a driver behind the scenes, if the unreliability of the scientific police is accepted in this case then it might have repercussions for those convicted on DNA grounds in other cases. It was highly inappropriate to suggest that a decision on this case should be predicated on the consequences for others but it was said. Someone else can fish out the exact quote.

FWIW I once dated a police officer, apparently it used to be common to fit up criminals; the understanding was that so long as you fitted them up for crimes they did that was a 'fair cop'. The problems came when an over ambitious detective tried to fit up e.g. a burglar for a bank robbery apparently this was taking liberties and just not on. Nowadays this doesn't happen I was told!

 

[Planigale]

duplicate

 

[Poppy1016]

I wonder if the RIS has commented or what their thoughts may be about this conviction and motivation report.

 

[Bill Williams]

I wonder if the RIS has commented or what their thoughts may be about this conviction and motivation report.

Given the calunnia and defamation laws in Italy, one can bet everyone is staying quiet.

Who cares, really, that innocent people go to jail when DNA experts like Nencini have a reputation to protect.

 

[Poppy1016]

Given the calunnia and defamation laws in Italy, one can bet everyone is staying quiet.

Who cares, really, that innocent people go to jail when DNA experts like Nencini have a reputation to protect.

But their honor and scientific abilities have been totally squashed by this court.

 

[Bill Williams]

There is a comment in the first ISC appeal where the prosecutor says that accepting the findings of the defence might invalidate the use of DNA more broadly. I suspect that this may be a driver behind the scenes, if the unreliability of the scientific police is accepted in this case then it might have repercussions for those convicted on DNA grounds in other cases. It was highly inappropriate to suggest that a decision on this case should be predicated on the consequences for others but it was said. Someone else can fish out the exact quote.

FWIW I once dated a police officer, apparently it used to be common to fit up criminals; the understanding was that so long as you fitted them up for crimes they did that was a 'fair cop'. The problems came when an over ambitious detective tried to fit up e.g. a burglar for a bank robbery apparently this was taking liberties and just not on. Nowadays this doesn't happen I was told!

It's not just the prosecutor who says this.... this is the way it is written up in the motivations justifying the March 2013 quashing of the Hellmann acquittals, and it leaves the impression that the prosecutor's reasons are compelling:

Also well founded is further criticism raised by the public plaintiff,
according to which the signs of the experts were passively incorporated, as
to the mere inadequacy of the investigations carried out by the Scientific
Police, who were not renewed, the experts having considered inadequate
the two samples in question ( 36 and 165 B) for the detection of the genetic
profile and due to the fact that it could not be ruled out that the result was
derived "from contamination phenomena occurring at any stage of
sampling and/or handling and/or analytical processes made” . From p. 75
p. 82 the Court adopted the arguments developed in the assesment that,
indeed, had been the subject of severe disagreement with both Prof. Novelli
that Prof. Torricelli, consultants of the Procurator General and the civil
parties, whose authoritative voices were completely neglected. Prof.
Novelli had agreed that there are protocols and recommendations, but
added that first of all the operator had to contribute his common sense (ud.
6.9.2011, p. Transcription 59.), otherwise it put in question all the DNA
analysis done from 1986 onwards.​

 

[Bill Williams]

But their honor and scientific abilities have been totally squashed by this court.

Apparently the party of the PMs controls who gets prosecuted for these things.

For instance, when Amanda Knox said she'd been hit at interrogation, it feel to Comodi to "investigate" the allegation. Comodi called Ficcara in and said, "Did you hit her?" Ficcara said, "no."

I'm not so cynical as to suggest that they filled out the defamation forms right there after that two-line "investigation".

 

[Bill Williams]

Acc. to Italian speakers.....

Nencini initially plays around in his motivations report with the idea that there was a clean-up in Meredith's room, but then he dismisses the idea.

Given that he has Amanda wielding the knife, this is a complete inconsistency in his report. However, in perhaps the only wise/sane thought he's had, he perhaps simply gives up on the notion that someone can selectively clean DNA, or handprint-in-blood evidence, so eventually simissed the idea.

The implication Nencini seems to draw is that Meredith's door was locked because her room couldn't be cleaned.

Nencini also dismisses the break-in as having anything to do with Guede on the grounds that Guede was too much of a professional burglar. He was such a professional that a locked front door would not have delayed him at all if he'd wanted. Rudy would also have never stopped for a pooh in the toilet during a burglary, because he was too professional - Rudying poohing is proof that he was there in somewhat more "normal" circumstances - for Nencini, because Amanda let him in.

Also, despite many posts here from people like Machiavelli which state that Knox was a master-manipulator and crime-scene stager, Nencini calls the staged burglary clumsy, proof it was done by an amateur.

Why do Italian judges just get to invent things, things not even mentioned at trial?

 

[Samson]

Acc. to Italian speakers.....

Nencini initially plays around in his motivations report with the idea that there was a clean-up in Meredith's room, but then he dismisses the idea.

Given that he has Amanda wielding the knife, this is a complete inconsistency in his report. However, in perhaps the only wise/sane thought he's had, he perhaps simply gives up on the notion that someone can selectively clean DNA, or handprint-in-blood evidence, so eventually simissed the idea.

The implication Nencini seems to draw is that Meredith's door was locked because her room couldn't be cleaned.

Nencini also dismisses the break-in as having anything to do with Guede on the grounds that Guede was too much of a professional burglar. He was such a professional that a locked front door would not have delayed him at all if he'd wanted. Rudy would also have never stopped for a pooh in the toilet during a burglary, because he was too professional - Rudying poohing is proof that he was there in somewhat more "normal" circumstances - for Nencini, because Amanda let him in.

Also, despite many posts here from people like Machiavelli which state that Knox was a master-manipulator and crime-scene stager, Nencini calls the staged burglary clumsy, proof it was done by an amateur.

Why do Italian judges just get to invent things, things not even mentioned at trial?

This is all wrong. Guede threw the rock partly to confirm no one was home. This is a common procedure according to an experienced member here. No doubt he realised before throwing that the external shutters would allow concealment of the entry once inside. The glass distribution was professionally placed for a staging, which it wasn't.
Nothing taken is because of interruption. How does Nencini know that Rudy doesn't enjoy the challenge of a difficult entry.
The most insulting thing he has done is stating Amanda stole the money, which she didn't need and Rudy did, leaving his fingerprints. Think about that. Luca Cheli could do a brilliant update of his story.

 

[Desert Fox]

Acc. to Italian speakers.....
Why do Italian judges just get to invent things, things not even mentioned at trial?

In the US, the jury does not even need to give reasoning behind a guilty verdict.
How many US trials have verdicts for just as bad a reasoning?

 

[carbonjam72]

US jury verdicts are no prize either. So who does it right?

In the US, the jury does not even need to give reasoning behind a guilty verdict.
How many US trials have verdicts for just as bad a reasoning?

Jury deliberations in the US are secret by law. So, we'll never know.

But the likelihood is high I think that jury verdicts are horrendous contraptions of compromises and illogic, though while reaching the same conclusions, may do so in flatly contradictory ways.

All that counts is a unanimous vote, or lack thereof. So don't look to US for any help in safeguarding verdicts.