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

[Planigale]

Ok, so this is very close to an answer. If she is routinely "sloppy", and knows she can get 'findings' that occasionally show up that are favorable to the prosecution, does she know before she starts testing the knife, that she can "find" meredith's DNA, if she tries hard enough?

(Especially given the fact that Meredith's DNA had been tested in the lab on the same equipment, in quantity at some point previously. Exposure to open air? Residue in the machine that becomes readable by amping up the noise?)

Or does she think if she runs enough samples, in small enough (i.e. unreliable) quantity, in non-repeatable (by destroying evidence) and non-verifable testing (by hiding data), she has a good shot at achieving that 'finding' AND depriving the defense of any opportunity to dispute it?

It seems to me, that her having constructive knowledge that the target DNA is, or has been recently, physically present in the lab, then she's effectively cheating by specifically looking for a residual trace contamination, and claiming its a 'finding' of legitimate analysis.
Is having a "good shot" at finding the result she needs by playing up to and beyond the edge of reliability, enough certainty for the police to believe they can pick out any knife at random, and, "it will do"?

Do the police believe Stefanoni can 'probably find a DNA match', or certainly will find a match?

Knowing the order of testing samples, how close are they to having tested Meredith's DNA is relevant, no? If it's closer in time, and they know it AND conceal it, doesn't that suggest they are 'playing' with contamination and full well know it?

There's not much of a difference between 'good shot' and a 'sure thing', but look at the timing. Wasn't it the day after Raf's family disproved the shoe print was Raf's, that Stefanoni came up with these 2 crucial DNA matches?

It's a small difference, but still a difference. I'm starting to lean to the 'good shot' camp', though I was probably a 'sure thing' when I started writing this post. On balance, I don't think she's competent or ethical. So a 'sure thing' doesn't seem to fit her vocabulary, because everything she does is half-way. If it's just a 'good shot' combined with the ability to hide the data and destroy the sample so no re-testing, well that's a strategy.

Maybe the most interesting question is the mindset. What does she think she's doing? Good science, Good police work, or Good framing?

I continue to think well of Stefanoni (in that I think she was not deliberately fixing results). I think she really did not think there was a contamination issue. I think that what she had noticed is that if you run lots of samples at LCN eventually you get a result. I think that occasionally she got favourable results; if you are only analysing incriminating samples then so long as one turns up that is fine. Just think of the other samples, if MK DNA had turned up on the Luminol positive samples from Sollecito's flat, or his boxer's or his shoes it would have been just as bad.

I blame the director of the lab whose responsibility it was to ensure proper protocols were in place, and below him the QA manager, (although I suspect there was no QA manager, which illustrates why there should have been one).

I think it is cheating but it is deniable including to oneself. I suspect record keeping was just sloppy they only kept results they thought were significant.

 

[codyjuneau]

.
I posted a couple of times before that there was a thin earphone/earbud type wire coming out of Meredith's white shoulder bag and going under the pillow she was found on top of. It turns out there is a picture of the earbud on Steve Moore's website. I uploaded the pic, click on the thumb to see a large version, the earbud is peaking out of the left side of the pillow:

.
.

 

[Diocletus]

I continue to think well of Stefanoni (in that I think she was not deliberately fixing results). I think she really did not think there was a contamination issue. I think that what she had noticed is that if you run lots of samples at LCN eventually you get a result. I think that occasionally she got favourable results; if you are only analysing incriminating samples then so long as one turns up that is fine. Just think of the other samples, if MK DNA had turned up on the Luminol positive samples from Sollecito's flat, or his boxer's or his shoes it would have been just as bad.

I blame the director of the lab whose responsibility it was to ensure proper protocols were in place, and below him the QA manager, (although I suspect there was no QA manager, which illustrates why there should have been one).

I think it is cheating but it is deniable including to oneself. I suspect record keeping was just sloppy they only kept results they thought were significant.

I found a batch of RT-qPCR where her NTC came up with Ct=34. (can't believe I just wrote that sentence).

So, did she stop all presses, investigate the source of contamination and report the event? No.

She simply reduced her cut-off for positive quantifications for that batch to Ct=33, profiled all of the ensuing samples, and then testified in court that her lab had never had contamination.

Is that an innocent series of events?

 

[Diocletus]

.
I posted a couple of times before that there was a thin earphone/earbud type wire coming out of Meredith's white shoulder bag and going under the pillow she was found on top of. It turns out there is a picture of the earbud on Steve Moore's website. I uploaded the pic, click on the thumb to see a large version, the earbud is peaking out of the left side of the pillow:

.[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_52761536939797fcaa.jpg[/qimg]
.

Wasn't Rudy listening to that while he was on the potty, before the "real killer" attacked him?

 

[acbytesla]

I continue to think well of Stefanoni (in that I think she was not deliberately fixing results). I think she really did not think there was a contamination issue. I think that what she had noticed is that if you run lots of samples at LCN eventually you get a result. I think that occasionally she got favourable results; if you are only analysing incriminating samples then so long as one turns up that is fine. Just think of the other samples, if MK DNA had turned up on the Luminol positive samples from Sollecito's flat, or his boxer's or his shoes it would have been just as bad.

I blame the director of the lab whose responsibility it was to ensure proper protocols were in place, and below him the QA manager, (although I suspect there was no QA manager, which illustrates why there should have been one).

I think it is cheating but it is deniable including to oneself. I suspect record keeping was just sloppy they only kept results they thought were significant.

The problem is that running a samples and getting NO results is in fact getting a result and a tech should be just as pleased with a negative result.

But Stefanoni's approach ended up being a suspect oriented approach. I can't excuse Stefanoni that easily since she is willing to ignore the negative TMB results and refuse to turn over the EDF files. This is not what I would say is an academic approach to the truth.

 

[codyjuneau]

Wasn't Rudy listening to that while he was on the potty, before the "real killer" attacked him?

.
I think Rudy said he was on the toilet listening to an Ipod. I doubt he was using this particular earbud because the other end of the wire goes into Meredith's bag.

It is possible Meredith was listening to her own Ipod when she came home. That would have made it easier for Rudy to sneak up on her. Or maybe they were both listening to Ipods and bumped into each other.
.

 

[Bill Williams]

Thank you, interesting article in as much as the reported comments relating to the Vecchiotti and Conti, if accurate it appears that the Florence motivations are critical of Vecchiotti and Conti findings and then some.

Also the defence teams have 45 days to lodge their appeal, not much time.

It would also be interesting hearing an opinion about the significance of Raffaele's 112 call to the Carabinieri (in relation to the arrival of the Postal Police).....

When Amanda had already summoned Filomena to the scene?

According to Massei, it was a little after 12 noon. The import of the whole "Which came first, the 112 call or the arrival of the Posties", is that guilters believe that Battistelli had caught Knox and Sollecito unaware; and it was only then that AK and RS needed to establish that they'd been putting out the alarm.

Well, according to Massei's timeline, the Postal Police arrive, "a little before 1 pm." So Knox and Sollecito had been putting out the alarm for almost an hour by that time.

And by ALL accounts, the Postal Police had the same "level of alarm" as Raffaele and Amanda. They refused to knock down Meredith's door, not suspecting anything, really, more than a confusing burglary where nothing obvious had been stolen.....

...... other than the phones and money behind that locked door, with Rudy's fingerprints in Meredith's purse.

So.... do you find anything meaningful in Nencini resurrecting the claim, demonstrably false, that Raffaele called 112 only after Battistelli's arrival?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Nencini is and Nencini is not - critical of C&V that is.

One of the reasons The Supreme Court overturned Hellmann was not because of C&V, per se. It was because they thought that Hellmann had abdicated his judicial responsibility by letting C&V decide not to test sample 36i on its own. The ISC tasked the Florence trial with correcting this mistake - not of C&V's, but of Hellmann's.

With regard to the other findings of C&V, Nencini simply seems to return to the logic used by Massei, the 1st level judge who did not want an independent test at all. The "logic" with Massei was (basically) if Stefanoni claimed it, it must be true.

To say that the Florence motivations is critical of C&V's findings is not actually true. The motivations will raise certain issues which one assumes might have been picked up later in the document to contribute to a conclusion, then the point is lost.

And if you regard the Florence motivations as having any credibility whatsoever, what do you make of Raffaele's DNA now being claimed on the knife? That was not even claimed by the prosecutor, Crini?

Bill

Must admit I am not following events as closely as some, I skimmed the article Kestrel linked and that seemed to be pretty critical of V & C, hostile even. However, I take the point that pro innocence\guilt commentators will present those parts of the motivation report that is consistent with their position, therefore it would be sensible to wait for the complete translation.

I also read through the link Anglolawyer provided and have concluded the obvious, which is the future does not look very promising for Raffaele if you factor in investigations relating to extracts from his book, members of his own defence team might be under investigation by the end of the year.

I believe the Italian Supreme Court will confirm Raffaele’s verdict, then onto the next phase of the process and the only European institution that is slower than the Italian justice the European Count Human Rights.

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill

Must admit I am not following events as closely as some, I skimmed the article Kestrel linked and that seemed to be pretty critical of V & C, hostile even. However, I take the point that pro innocence\guilt commentators will present those parts of the motivation report that is consistent with their position, therefore it would be sensible to wait for the complete translation.

I also read through the link Anglolawyer provided and have concluded the obvious, which is the future does not look very promising for Raffaele if you factor in investigations relating to extracts from his book, members of his own defence team might be under investigation by the end of the year.

I believe the Italian Supreme Court will confirm Raffaele’s verdict, then onto the next phase of the process and the only European institution that is slower than the Italian justice the European Count Human Rights.

Well, you were following events close enough to (out of the blue) place a link to Andrea Vogt's view of things. Fair enough.

My guess is that even after a translation, you will still opt to post guilt-sounding posts, while claiming not to have an opinion. That, too, is fair game.

So, here's another link.

If one is to believe Nencini, that indeed Rudy Guede provides proof that Meredith and Amanda were fighting over rent money.... consider ALL of Rudy's story: the origins of which are when Rudy is in custody in Germany, and cannot be "coached" by Perugians eager to pin things on Amanda.

While in Germany, Rudy has to craft an alibi that places the blmae on someone else, while at the same time not being TOO specific in claiming things he might not know the police know.

Like Amanda's presence at the cottage during the "Meredith complained that Knox was stealing" story.

http://www.allthingscrimeblog.com/2014/05/06/rudy-guede-lifts-the-weight-off-amanda-knoxs-chest-and-puts-it-back-on-again/​

In Rudy's first, pre-contact-with-Mignini story Knox simply cannot be at the cottage during the "row", because Rudy says Meredith goes into Knox's room to check to see if the missing money is there. There is actually no argument between the two in Rudy's story - just that Meredith suspected theft and went to Amanda's room when Amanda wasn't there.

Then, instead of blaming people he (it is claimed) knew were there, he cannot risk this with the Germans.... so he blames a single, unknown stranger.

Out of this Nencini lifts one factoid and one factoid alone: that the row was over money. Perhaps the reason Mignini did not encourage Guede to keep remembering this is because it didn't fit the sex-angle.

Enter Maresca.... my money is on that Maresca got to Nencini about motive. The sex-game is alleging something about Meredith that, heck, even Piers Morgan scoffed at in April 2013 when Jeffery Toobin and Gloria Allred were on his CNN show talking about the ISC's motive for the crime.

Say what you want, but sex-game does not fit. It does not fit Meredith - or Knox and Sollecito for that matter. It didn't fit for Judge Massei either. For Massei it was Rudy's lust that started this.

But now Nencini has cherry-picked one factoid from a story form a person EVERYONE agrees is a liar.

Are you going to await the translation before commenting on this? Perhaps not.

 

[Samson]

Bill

Must admit I am not following events as closely as some, I skimmed the article Kestrel linked and that seemed to be pretty critical of V & C, hostile even. However, I take the point that pro innocence\guilt commentators will present those parts of the motivation report that is consistent with their position, therefore it would be sensible to wait for the complete translation.

I also read through the link Anglolawyer provided and have concluded the obvious, which is the future does not look very promising for Raffaele if you factor in investigations relating to extracts from his book, members of his own defence team might be under investigation by the end of the year.

I believe the Italian Supreme Court will confirm Raffaele’s verdict, then onto the next phase of the process and the only European institution that is slower than the Italian justice the European Count Human Rights.

But the real question is
1. Will they jail him immediately on confirmation?
2.Will he remain at large while they pursue his co murderer?
3.Will they wait for the ECHR to rule?

Obviously there is an answer to these questions for someone with knowledge.

Should he marry and have children while he has time, or should he defer his life to judicial process?

 

[Samson]

Well, you were following events close enough to (out of the blue) place a link to Andrea Vogt's view of things. Fair enough.

My guess is that even after a translation, you will still opt to post guilt-sounding posts, while claiming not to have an opinion. That, too, is fair game.

So, here's another link.

If one is to believe Nencini, that indeed Rudy Guede provides proof that Meredith and Amanda were fighting over rent money.... consider ALL of Rudy's story: the origins of which are when Rudy is in custody in Germany, and cannot be "coached" by Perugians eager to pin things on Amanda.

While in Germany, Rudy has to craft an alibi that places the blmae on someone else, while at the same time not being TOO specific in claiming things he might not know the police know.

Like Amanda's presence at the cottage during the "Meredith complained that Knox was stealing" story.

http://www.allthingscrimeblog.com/2014/05/06/rudy-guede-lifts-the-weight-off-amanda-knoxs-chest-and-puts-it-back-on-again/​

In Rudy's first, pre-contact-with-Mignini story Knox simply cannot be at the cottage during the "row", because Rudy says Meredith goes into Knox's room to check to see if the missing money is there. There is actually no argument between the two in Rudy's story - just that Meredith suspected theft and went to Amanda's room when Amanda wasn't there.

Then, instead of blaming people he (it is claimed) knew were there, he cannot risk this with the Germans.... so he blames a single, unknown stranger.

Out of this Nencini lifts one factoid and one factoid alone: that the row was over money. Perhaps the reason Mignini did not encourage Guede to keep remembering this is because it didn't fit the sex-angle.

Enter Maresca.... my money is on that Maresca got to Nencini about motive. The sex-game is alleging something about Meredith that, heck, even Piers Morgan scoffed at in April 2013 when Jeffery Toobin and Gloria Allred were on his CNN show talking about the ISC's motive for the crime.

Say what you want, but sex-game does not fit. It does not fit Meredith - or Knox and Sollecito for that matter. It didn't fit for Judge Massei either. For Massei it was Rudy's lust that started this.

But now Nencini has cherry-picked one factoid from a story form a person EVERYONE agrees is a liar.

Are you going to await the translation before commenting on this? Perhaps not.

This is a really good point. The Kercher family now have Meredith in as happy a place as they can, she died as a goddess. They have as close to closure as possible. Rudy sexually attacked from behind, and Amanda and Raffaele held her from behind. She did not suffer the pain of seeing her attackers.

 

[Grinder]

I continue to think well of Stefanoni (in that I think she was not deliberately fixing results). I think she really did not think there was a contamination issue. I think that what she had noticed is that if you run lots of samples at LCN eventually you get a result. I think that occasionally she got favourable results; if you are only analysing incriminating samples then so long as one turns up that is fine. Just think of the other samples, if MK DNA had turned up on the Luminol positive samples from Sollecito's flat, or his boxer's or his shoes it would have been just as bad.

I blame the director of the lab whose responsibility it was to ensure proper protocols were in place, and below him the QA manager, (although I suspect there was no QA manager, which illustrates why there should have been one).

I think it is cheating but it is deniable including to oneself. I suspect record keeping was just sloppy they only kept results they thought were significant.

i agree that if they were "cheating" or "framing" they could have done a much bigger and better job of it. They had access to plenty of MK's DNA and blood and could have "found" some in a lot of places, shoes, clothes ,bags (where she carried the knife), etc.

The one piece of evidence that was the most suspicious to me was the bra clasp. I've thought it was possible a helpful cop could have rubbed the clasp.

 

[Desert Fox]

The one piece of evidence that was the most suspicious to me was the bra clasp. I've thought it was possible a helpful cop could have rubbed the clasp.

That is the thing. . . A framing does not mean everybody is involved

 

[acbytesla]

i agree that if they were "cheating" or "framing" they could have done a much bigger and better job of it. They had access to plenty of MK's DNA and blood and could have "found" some in a lot of places, shoes, clothes ,bags (where she carried the knife), etc.

The one piece of evidence that was the most suspicious to me was the bra clasp. I've thought it was possible a helpful cop could have rubbed the clasp.

WOW!!! We agree on something. I have never liked all the very strange coincidences but have never believed in a full out conspiracy. Maybe more Group think and one, maybe two, maybe three people on their own being overly zealous in their approach to the evidence.

To me, it is no coincidence that the scientific police went back to the cottage desperately seeking new evidence since their case against Raffaele and Amanda was falling apart due to the mistake about the shoes.

The entire Perugian police authorities had 46 days of 5 weeks of turning Amanda and Raffaele into demons. They had appeared before the press and declared to the world that they had solved their crime and these two kids were at the center of it. They had been puffing out their chests and were International stars prosecuting the evil American girl. And now they had NOTHING on Raffaele and the fact that Raffaele was providing the alibi for Amanda, they really had nothing on her either.

This is the only piece of evidence and they made such a bizarre show of picking up just another piece of clothing. Never mind that Meredith's bloody sweatshirt was piled in the corner.

They were too late probably to frame other evidence. I mean I would have convicted Raffaele on the shoes if they truly matched his shoes. Would have done it in a minute or less. But without them..what do they have?

But I do believe that Stefanoni was and is very sloppy in her work and she had no desire to have people critiquing her so she refused to provide the EDF files which would have allowed that.

 

[Dan O.]

Nice map, Dan O.
Can you also do another map, 1 from Rudy Guede's 2nd interrogation with PM Mignini,
an alternate Guede path than what yours shows?

Using Rudy's own words, let's see where he walked when he went to meet Meredith on their 1st "date".

Also, can you put in the location of Tana dell’Orso too?

Is it here(?)
http://www.tavernadellorso.it/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=54
Località S.Egidio, 1km dopo il paese direzione Ripa Strada s.Egidio-Civitella 7, 06134 Perugia

The photo's of the place look like a nice place to kick back with friends...
This is a place where Amanda, Raff, Meredith, and English gal friends had drank some wine just a coupla days before her murder.

Keep in mind that near Tana dell'Orso was the kebab takeaway,
from where Rudy Guede had a kebab sandwich, as mentioned in page 34 of his 2nd interrogation with Mignini.

Guede's interrogation has him, after leaving Meredith's flat that night, walking by the basketball court where he sees some guys, whom he believes are The Chinese, playin' ball. Guede seems to know the streets and steps of Perugia fairly well, he mentions alotta detail in this interrogation when describing his travels to visit friends and Meredith, have a read from page 60:

Pros. Mignini - Yes, then you left
Guede - Well indeed I left the house and anyway I headed towards my house.
Pros. Mignini What route did you take?
Guede - I did, I left Meredith’s house and I took the steps, I mean, there are
these steps
Pros. Mignini - I understand, those alongside the court
Guede - The basketball court
Pros. Mignini - Understood. Did you come across anybody?
Guede - Well I can tell you that I went along the… there’s the basketball
court, the road parallel to it and at that time there were some guys,
now I wouldn’t be able to say if they were Chinese, however
because usually at that time the Chinese play, even though it’s dark
they are there and I saw these people with a basketball.
Pros. Mignini - But anybody coming down the steps, did you…
Napoleoni - Did you meet anybody?
Guede - No, no
Pros. Mignini - You don’t remember, and so you then went towards …
Guede - Then what I did, well why did I do this? For fear, because I was all…
the hands covered in blood, I would have preferred to go along
Corso Garibaldi however seeing as there were so many people
about at that time, because there are the bars, Pizza restaurants, the
University, I don’t know if you know of the steps that descend to the
side of the University that then go back up to the top.
Pros. Mignini - Yes
Guede - I took that route and I came out a bit further ahead of [illegible] after
via Tedesca now I don’t remember exactly which road and then I
headed to my house. On via del Canerino.
Pros. Mignini - Where did you wash yourself?
Guede - Eh I went into my house and I headed, there’s a launderette where I
live and there were some rags and I think, I don’t think I touched any
of these rags and then after I’d washed my hands in the basin
however…

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/RG-Transcript.pdf

A map of this, from Guede's own words, would be nice to see.
RW

See how Mignini butts in with incorrect information. He thinks he knows what steps Rudy is talking about because he has previous testimony from people that saw a black man running up the steps beside the basketball court. But those steps are not on Rudy's route home. From Rudy's description, he wanted to avoid the main street that goes directly to his house. He goes up a secondary street parallel to the university to the steps...

ETA: Google maps doesn't show any connection at the top of theses steps but there is another set on Via Lupitelli that does connect through but this one was more photogenic.

Rudy should know the area since he lives there. Being able to recall details of the route is not evidence that he took that route on that night. Somehow the phones and possibly the murder weapon and Meredith's keys ended up on the other side of the park.

 

[Poppy1016]

Has Nencini explained the clasp being destroyed by being stored in liquid? Or did Stephony give a reason for this stupidity? How can this point go unchallenged?

 

[Desert Fox]

Has Nencini explained the clasp being destroyed by being stored in liquid? Or did Stephony give a reason for this stupidity? How can this point go unchallenged?

Are there any equivalent cases of convenient destruction of evidence?

 

[Poppy1016]

Are there any equivalent cases of convenient destruction of evidence?

I'm sure there are.

 

[Poppy1016]

How many actions that are compatible with either framing or corruption, or both, does it take to equal actual framing or corruption? If the answer is three, well we have fraud or corruption to the extreme since there are many more then three such actions.

 

[Dan O.]

I think Dan O's proposition needs a new thread, as do a multitude of subjects.

We are all guests here on JREF. Let's try to keep our litter confined to this corner. There is plenty of room to branch out discussions on the IIP sub forum of IA (many of the threads already exist) and for really detailed examination of the evidence I would suggest my wiki is the place to be.