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

[Dan O.]

It is important to say that griffinmills is an exception, in the sense that in good faith g.m. DOES present a narrative - of sorts - presented without the usual ad hominem which is directed towards innocentisi's.

For some reason I only see the parts of griffinmills arguments that get quoted by others. I can't even remember why this is but there must have been a good reason at the time. I don't recall seeing any such narrative so perhaps I need to review...

On Feb 4 of this year, griffinmills came to this forum with a single claim:

I find it curious that neither Knox nor Sollecito ever state their alibis in their many interviews.

This claim was repeated over and over with no acknowledgements of the defects in the claim that were brought up in reply. In particular, griffinmills will not provide a narrative of the crime or even the time for which he believes Amanda and Raffaele need to provide an alibi for.

griffinmills claims to want to have a real life and not be subjected to having to answer questions yet at the same time he is determined to deny that real life to two innocent people accused of this crime. I find that unacceptable.

 

[Grinder]

Second, criminals have been convicted or exonerated on DNA evidence in recent years that is decades old. How is it possible their DNA is absolutely reliable, collected in who knows what way, but the DNA for Knox/Sollecito isn't?

(Shhhhhhsh griffinmill.... we're supposed to ignore that.)

You both miss the point. Of course DNA can last for thousands of years, but where did the clasp travel in those 46 days and to whom do the other DNAs belong. The murder room was tossed by the Flying Squad the two days after the ICSI were done. Among things found later were bloody clothing of Meredith's in a waste basket. There are pictures taken by Barbie Nadeau between the 5th and the 18th of December showing that the seal on the door was altered. It does not appear that the cottage was secure.

Personally I think that if Raf's DNA was on the bra clasp it got on there the way the other men's DNA got on there. Although the ICSI only found Raf's DNA in one place that doesn't mean it wasn't more widespread in the cottage where they didn't look.

It is notable that they found Raf's DNA on the clasp and Meredith's on the knife and would be a strong argument for guilt if so much of the CSI's work wasn't so questionable. It is hard to know what findings Stefanoni didn't report.

 

[Dan O.]

Hmmm. I'd like to try to come up with a graphic that captures -- for us lesser mortals -- exactly how the processes compare.

It helps to be able to show side by side comparisons so that differences pop out for people who aren't going to read through long explanations or figure out how detailed spreadsheets convey meaning.

Maybe 3 columns with respect to the testing of the kitchen knife:

Stef, CV, Carabinieri

Down the left side could be a checklist of standard procedures that lead to valid results. Under each column could be yes/no/unknown. The idea would be to demonstrate visually the highlighted bit above.

I can make this image if someone can name the elements on that checklist.

This looks like a place to start:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/forensic-qas-audit-9-1-11

 

[acbytesla]

Originally Posted by griffinmill View Post
Second, criminals have been convicted or exonerated on DNA evidence in recent years that is decades old. How is it possible their DNA is absolutely reliable, collected in who knows what way, but the DNA for Knox/Sollecito isn't?

(Shhhhhhsh griffinmill.... we're supposed to ignore that.)

Of course this actually ignores the whole point DNA can last for years, decades, even centuries. That is irrelevant. It is not the 46 days that is significant. It is the environment it came from.

It is not the DNA that is contaminated, it is the source where it originated. I'm sure that in these cases where someone has been exonerated or convicted by DNA that is tested many years later, the source of that DNA is discussed about at length.

But I'm still waiting for Griffin or any of the PGP to address the most important question involving the evidence. Why didn't Amanda or Raffaele leave any finger or footprints in that bedroom? Did they hover during the murder?

 

[kwill]

This looks like a place to start:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/forensic-qas-audit-9-1-11

Thanks, Dan O.

 

[JREF2010]

You both miss the point. Of course DNA can last for thousands of years, but where did the clasp travel in those 46 days and to whom do the other DNAs belong. The murder room was tossed by the Flying Squad the two days after the ICSI were done. Among things found later were bloody clothing of Meredith's in a waste basket. There are pictures taken by Barbie Nadeau between the 5th and the 18th of December showing that the seal on the door was altered. It does not appear that the cottage was secure.

Personally I think that if Raf's DNA was on the bra clasp it got on there the way the other men's DNA got on there. Although the ICSI only found Raf's DNA in one place that doesn't mean it wasn't more widespread in the cottage where they didn't look.

It is notable that they found Raf's DNA on the clasp and Meredith's on the knife and would be a strong argument for guilt if so much of the CSI's work wasn't so questionable. It is hard to know what findings Stefanoni didn't report.

In addition to this, the magnification wasn't done consistently on all items. So in truth if Stephony had performed the same approach and plotted everything showing 10RFU and the garbage ranges, its likely contamination would be seen on an abundance of items.

Its why the OEM of the tools tell the users to ignore lower RFU peaks. Its basically garbage noise peaks.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The ABA standards on DNA evidence

And does that result in reasonable doubt the DNA data is so compromised that it can't be reliable? For you, yes. For me the answer is no.

Griffinmill,

"Standard 2.1 Collecting DNA evidence from a crime scene or other location

(a) Whenever a serious crime appears to have been committed and there is reason to believe that DNA evidence relevant to the crime may be present at the crime scene or other location, that evidence should be collected promptly." (highlighting mine)

The reason is to minimize the chances of contamination. When I discussed the collection of the bra clasp and the luminol evidence informally with a former police officer whose job it had been to secure crime scenes, the first words out of his mouth were, "Contaminated, contaminated." Another reason that late collection is a poor idea is that by this time the defendants were already in custody and a great deal of prejudicial material had been disseminated about them (some by the contrivances of ILE). This increases the chances of forensic bias, even unconsciously, coming into play.

Yes, DNA evidence can last for years, unless the item is stored in a closed container with an aliquot of extraction buffer to moisten up the atmosphere. Then the evidence rots and rusts. I know this because ILE already did the experiment.

 

[Dan O.]

There are pictures taken by Barbie Nadeau between the 5th and the 18th of December showing that the seal on the door was altered. It does not appear that the cottage was secure.

The cottage was sealed on November 7 and according to police testimony, there was no access until December 18 when additional evidence, including the bra clasp, were recovered. The seals were reported to be intact at the time of the subsequent entry.

It is one picture taken by Barbie using her editor's Sony camera on the morning of November 14 showing the seal pealed down and the front door open. On December 18 the seal is seen reattached with additional tape and the investigators are unlocking the front door with a key. In court testimony they claimed that the seal was intact and make no mention of having to re-lock and re-seal the door.

The photo has been posted on the web for all to see since November 16 yet I've never heard Barbie address this. Source: http://lastrada.blogspot.com/2007/11/perugia-crime-scene-14-november-2007-as.html

 

[Anode]

Of course this actually ignores the whole point DNA can last for years, decades, even centuries. That is irrelevant. It is not the 46 days that is significant. It is the environment it came from.

It is not the DNA that is contaminated, it is the source where it originated. I'm sure that in these cases where someone has been exonerated or convicted by DNA that is tested many years later, the source of that DNA is discussed about at length.

But I'm still waiting for Griffin or any of the PGP to address the most important question involving the evidence. Why didn't Amanda or Raffaele leave any finger or footprints in that bedroom? Did they hover during the murder?

Another question would be if Raffaele held down MK why is his DNA only on the bra clasp? Wouldn't it be all over her arm or shoulder too? Hard questions right?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

thresholds and additional peaks

In addition to this, the magnification wasn't done consistently on all items. So in truth if Stephony had performed the same approach and plotted everything showing 10RFU and the garbage ranges, its likely contamination would be seen on an abundance of items.

Its why the OEM of the tools tell the users to ignore lower RFU peaks. Its basically garbage noise peaks.

The lower one sets the cutoff, the greater the number of male contributors to the bra clasp and the more loci which show contributors. One likely source of contamination is from the door to a glove, and then to the clasp. It is known that DNA can be extracted from exam gloves. That is why one should change them frequently or preferably use a disposable pair of tweezers when collecting evidence.

Another problem with the knife DNA profile is that there are two peaks in one locus, both of which are about 15 RFU and neither of which is part of Meredith's profile. Those two peaks are no smaller than the smallest of the peaks attributed to Meredith, yet they are not marked on the egram. I suppose that they qualify as drop-in, but in any case, they should be explained.

 

[Vibio]

Another question would be if Raffaele held down MK why is his DNA only on the bra clasp? Wouldn't it be all over her arm or shoulder too?

No, not necessarily.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

E.A.M. Graham and G.N. Rutty wrote, "During the investigation of serious crime, such as assault, rape, or murder, DNA may be collected from the skin surface over areas in which physical contact has taken place in an attempt to identify the perpetrator."
J Forensic Sci, September 2008, Vol. 53, No. 5 doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00800.x

 

[Vibio]

E.A.M. Graham and G.N. Rutty wrote, "During the investigation of serious crime, such as assault, rape, or murder, DNA may be collected from the skin surface over areas in which physical contact has taken place in an attempt to identify the perpetrator."
J Forensic Sci, September 2008, Vol. 53, No. 5 doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00800.x

Yes, it may be collected.

Another question would be if Raffaele held down MK why is his DNA only on the bra clasp? Wouldn't it be all over her arm or shoulder too?

No, not necessarily.


--

 

[Desert Fox]

(Shhhhhhsh griffinmill.... we're supposed to ignore that.)

A while back, a group of Mormon researchers found some DNA from some coal seams. When they identified it, they though it was related to whale. It turned out to be human DNA. . .Contamination.
In fact there is a recent case where the DNA of a criminal who would have been something like seven or eight years old on a murder victim. . . .Again, they figured it was contamination.

Contamination is always a risk.

 

[Planigale]

An interesting insight (apologies for google translate) testimony of Walter Patumi 25/09/09.

"CONSULTANT - The cells of the hand that grabbed the handle albeit bloody, it is difficult, however, are left in survey so complex, in a process so perhaps articulated 70,00 € deserved to be ... Prosecutor DR COMFORTABLE - 70,00 €? CONSULTANT - French 70,00 € kit of Invitrogen for Y. Prosecutor DR COMFORTABLE - But she knows that the means state are very very limited. CONSULTANT - In fact, I regret sincerely. Prosecutor DR COMFORTABLE - I do not think it's for what Stefanoni has not done so. CONSULTANT - No well Dr. Stefanoni told us in hearing that it does so for economic reasons poor has not means sufficiently. Prosecutor DR COMFORTABLE - Actually I am not aware that he said it. CONSULTANT - The Dr. said at the hearing, yes, yes. Prosecutor DR COMFORTABLE - The said ... ADVISER - I'll give you the page if you want"

So it appears that Stefanoni was limited in the investigation by financial constraints. There are several hair samples (for instance some hair on the broken window) that were never analysed, to analyse the hair samples one ideally needs to do mitochondrial DNA. I wonder if the reason for this was financial. Perhaps Stefanoni was cutting corners because she had insufficient budget to thoroughly investigate. This may explain why so much evidence was left behind.

 

[acbytesla]

No, not necessarily.

This is true, but the real question is ..Where are the footprints of Amanda or Raffaele? Did they hover and only Rudy's feet/shoes touch the floor?

 

[Bill Williams]

Another question would be if Raffaele held down MK why is his DNA only on the bra clasp? Wouldn't it be all over her arm or shoulder too?

No, not necessarily.

Wow. What stunning critical commentary. Can you elaborate just a tiny bit? You do know that this is a horrible murder, don't you, and that two innocents are in the fight of their lives?

Or will your response to that be, "Not necessarily" too?

It convinces me. I am now switching sides.

 

[Grinder]

In addition to this, the magnification wasn't done consistently on all items. So in truth if Stephony had performed the same approach and plotted everything showing 10RFU and the garbage ranges, its likely contamination would be seen on an abundance of items.

Its why the OEM of the tools tell the users to ignore lower RFU peaks. Its basically garbage noise peaks.

Thanks that's a crucial point. She tested one "sample" from the knife in the extreme manner but not one from the other side.

Had she amplified all the "samples" the way she amplified the knife that "found" Meredith's DNA who knows how many times her DNA would have shown up where the normal testing had not "found" it.

This is a point that took me a while to learn about and perhaps the PGP folks when they consider that the reason Stefanoni didn't find Meredith's DNA on all sorts of things where it shouldn't have been is she didn't look in the same way as the knife.

I'm pretty when they read your post that it will change the oddness argument vis-a-vis the knife DNA.

 

[acbytesla]

Wow. What stunning critical commentary. Can you elaborate just a tiny bit? You do know that this is a horrible murder, don't you, and that two innocents are in the fight of their lives?

Or will your response to that be, "Not necessarily" too?

It convinces me. I am now switching sides.

I don't think we can intelligently speak about the absence of DNA. They only found 5 samples of DNA from Rudy in that bedroom. I think anecdotally, the absence of DNA from Amanda might be significant. But maybe only marginally so. However, I don't see how it is humanly possible for there not to be shoe prints or fingerprints in Meredith's blood belonging to Raffaele or Amanda.

 

[Planigale]

The transmission is two way. There is not only a lack of DNA transmission from Sollecito and Knox to kerchief, but a lack of transmission from Kercher to Sollecito / Knox. There should also be fibre transmission. The complete lack of exchange of DNA / blood / fibres is really strong evidence against their involvement in the crime. I had previously wondered why no fibre analysis was done, but the budget constraints are presumably the explanation.