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

[katy_did]

Ooh, new book by Prof. Peter Gill out on 9th June: Misleading DNA Evidence: Reasons for Miscarriages of Justice. Looks interesting:

Misleading DNA Evidence: A Guide for Scientists, Judges, and Lawyers presents the reasons miscarriages of justice can occur when dealing with DNA, what the role of the forensic scientist is throughout the process, and how judges and lawyers can educate themselves about all of the possibilities to consider when dealing with cases that involve DNA evidence.

DNA has become the gold standard by which a person can be placed at the scene of a crime, and the past decade has seen great advances in this powerful crime solving tool. But the statistics that analysts can attach to DNA evidence often vary, and in some cases the statistical weight assigned to that match, can vary enormously. The numbers provided to juries often overstate the evidence, and can result in a wrongful conviction. In addition to statistics, the way the evidence is collected, stored and analyzed can also result in a wrongful conviction due to contamination.

This book reviews high-profile and somewhat contentious cases to illustrate these points, including the death of Meredith Kercher. It examines crucial topics such as characterization of errors and determination of error rates, reporting DNA profiles and the source and sub-source levels, and the essentials of statement writing. It is a concise, readable resource that will help not only scientists, but legal professionals with limited scientific backgrounds, to understand the intricacies of DNA use in the justice system.

 

[Desert Fox]

Yeah, among other things, the whole concept seems to apply just to whatever the prosecutor has collected in his dossier. So, if the prosecution decides that the police perhaps have things that he doesn't want to have in his dossier, well, he just doesn't obtain it.

The US has been know for similar situation. Watching the documentary "Witchhunt" about the Kern County child abuse cases. Often they had physicals performed that showed no sexual abuse was performed and that would never reach the prosecutor (at least officially.) Still, everybody seemed hunkydory with prosecuting these people for child molesting.
Trouble is that as that as out of control it got, never know who might get caught up in it.

 

[acbytesla]

The US has been know for similar situation. Watching the documentary "Witchhunt" about the Kern County child abuse cases. Often they had physicals performed that showed no sexual abuse was performed and that would never reach the prosecutor.

It's against the law for a prosecutor to withhold evidence or fail to disclose. They can go to jail or be disbarred for this. Not that they ever see this kind of punishment. At most that seems to happen is the case is thrown out..although there are some notable exceptions.

 

[Desert Fox]

It's against the law for a prosecutor to withhold evidence or fail to disclose. They can go to jail or be disbarred for this. Not that they ever see this kind of punishment. At most that seems to happen is the case is thrown out..although there are some notable exceptions.

Eventually everybody was freed (except the two that died in prison) but John Stoll spent 20 years in prison. He protected himself in prison by claiming that he was incarcerated for selling a large amount of pot.

 

[Kaosium]

Are you referring to her closing arguments? The ones where she's supposed to argue "you should find my client innocent because of X, Y and Z"?

If so, I can tell you that X, Y and Z aren't going to include "because you screwed up and didn't order up the EDFs".

The request for the EDFs, if repeated to Nencini, would have been included in the 20 or 30 written issues raised by the defense in their pre-appeal filings. That's what we need to find if we are going to have any kind of an informed discussion on this issue. I happen to think that you will find that request in there, because it is one of a major issue before Massei. But, I don't have access to the pre-appeal filings, so I can't state that definitively.

Correct, and it was raised at the outset of the Nencini show trial and the argument used to deny the defense access was posted in these threads at the time. The prosecution argued that because the EDF on an individual sample would not determine how that DNA got into the sample (contamination or otherwise) that the defense had no need to see the EDFs and Nencini with his vast knowledge of forensic DNA science concurred.

 

[Rolfe]

The US has been know for similar situation. Watching the documentary "Witchhunt" about the Kern County child abuse cases. Often they had physicals performed that showed no sexual abuse was performed and that would never reach the prosecutor (at least officially.) Still, everybody seemed hunkydory with prosecuting these people for child molesting.
Trouble is that as that as out of control it got, never know who might get caught up in it.

I was involved in a case in England like that. A group of youths were inveigled into pleading guilty to a charge of burning some newborn mice with a cigarette lighter. My lab had sent the RSPCA a report saying that the mice had not been burned, but had in fact been killed instantly by having their heads crushed (which is not a crime no matter that you may wish it was).

Obviously the RSPCA had withheld that report from the defendants' legal advisers.

Rolfe.

 

[Desert Fox]

I was involved in a case in England like that. A group of youths were inveigled into pleading guilty to a charge of burning some newborn mice with a cigarette lighter. My lab had sent the RSPCA a report saying that the mice had not been burned, but had in fact been killed instantly by having their heads crushed (which is not a crime no matter that you may wish it was).

Obviously the RSPCA had withheld that report from the defendants' legal advisers.

Rolfe.

That does not fall under animal cruelty?

 

[Samson]

Why would the administrator of a website promoting a responsible cause of perceived justice, Peggy Ganong/Skeptical Bystander, refer to Raffaele Sollecito as Stabby/Knife Boy/Raffles/Horny Potter, which she has just done?

These people are totally beyond the pale.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Bongiorno and the raw data

Correct, and it was raised at the outset of the Nencini show trial and the argument used to deny the defense access was posted in these threads at the time. The prosecution argued that because the EDF on an individual sample would not determine how that DNA got into the sample (contamination or otherwise) that the defense had no need to see the EDFs and Nencini with his vast knowledge of forensic DNA science concurred.

Machiavelli, whom I believe sent tweets from the trial, wrote in a previous thread, "For the first time in an appeal the defence (Bongiorno) requested the DNA raw data.
Bongiorno had asked for the raw data only once, at the end of the 2009 trial; Massei refused saying they were irrelevant. The defence never asked for the raw data again. They did not request them in the Hellmann-Zanetti appeal.
It's the first time they make such request at the appeal. She explained the defence may need them because "they may allow us to prove the contamination process" (one among their 15 requests).
Nencini rejected, agreeing with PG Crini that they appear to be useles for the purpose of proving the contamination process."

 

[Rolfe]

That does not fall under animal cruelty?

No. The crime is "causing unnecessary suffering". An animal which is killed instantly doesn't suffer, so no crime. (I may have to go to court on one where a cat was shot through the heart, and let the bench decide if there was sufficient suffering to support a conviction.)

Rolfe.

 

[anglolawyer]

Machiavelli, whom I believe sent tweets from the trial, wrote in a previous thread, "For the first time in an appeal the defence (Bongiorno) requested the DNA raw data.
Bongiorno had asked for the raw data only once, at the end of the 2009 trial; Massei refused saying they were irrelevant. The defence never asked for the raw data again. They did not request them in the Hellmann-Zanetti appeal.
It's the first time they make such request at the appeal. She explained the defence may need them because "they may allow us to prove the contamination process" (one among their 15 requests).
Nencini rejected, agreeing with PG Crini that they appear to be useles for the purpose of proving the contamination process."

As I posted today, the defence experts requested the EDFs on 5th April 2011.

ETA and this disposes of Griffinmill's question. I won my bet with you Chris btw. Pay up.

 

[Desert Fox]

Why would the administrator of a website promoting a responsible cause of perceived justice, Peggy Ganong/Skeptical Bystander, refer to Raffaele Sollecito as Stabby/Knife Boy/Raffles/Horny Potter, which she has just done?

These people are totally beyond the pale.

I treat murders that I know are murders with more respect than that. They are still people and deserve respect as people.

 

[Desert Fox]

No. The crime is "causing unnecessary suffering". An animal which is killed instantly doesn't suffer, so no crime. (I may have to go to court on one where a cat was shot through the heart, and let the bench decide if there was sufficient suffering to support a conviction.)

Rolfe.

It may be horrible to me but my sensibilities do not make something illegal or legal. Granted, I think there is something wrong with someone who kills an animal for the sheer pleasure of it.

 

[Samson]

I treat murders that I know are murders with more respect than that. They are still people and deserve respect as people.

So do I, but this is a young man who one court has declared innocent. They are also enjoying the anxiety and internal stress within his family as a blood sport, and hoping their assets are seized.

 

[Kaosium]

Machiavelli, whom I believe sent tweets from the trial, wrote in a previous thread, "For the first time in an appeal the defence (Bongiorno) requested the DNA raw data.
Bongiorno had asked for the raw data only once, at the end of the 2009 trial; Massei refused saying they were irrelevant. The defence never asked for the raw data again. They did not request them in the Hellmann-Zanetti appeal.
It's the first time they make such request at the appeal. She explained the defence may need them because "they may allow us to prove the contamination process" (one among their 15 requests).
Nencini rejected, agreeing with PG Crini that they appear to be useles for the purpose of proving the contamination process."

Thanks for digging that up, Chris.

Machiavelli was wrong though, in the Hellmann trial the defense also requested the EDFs as did the independent experts, which was (in part) the subject of the e-mails between Stefanoni and Hellmann translated and published by Candace Dempsey. Machiavelli himself (perhaps after he wrote the above) also quoted the transcripts from the Hellmann trial where the independent experts said the defense wanted to see the EDFs.

 

[Desert Fox]

I am reading about the murder of Devon Guzman. Every knife in the Bloss/Hetzel household was seized during the investigation not just one.
Why would the detective seize just one knife?

 

[Bill Williams]

Apparently there's a Twitter/Facebook campaign Free Rudy Guede. Some of the allegations is that Amanda Knox actively framed him.

I've now seen everything.

 

[Anode]

I am reading about the murder of Devon Guzman. Every knife in the Bloss/Hetzel household was seized during the investigation not just one.
Why would the detective seize just one knife?

Indeed. He could tell by looking at it that it didn't match the sheet imprint so it must be the one ( sarcasm). You would think they would grab them all. But if you test them all and they all test positive then you have to assume contamination. Much easier with just one.

 

[Desert Fox]

Indeed. He could tell by looking at it that it didn't match the sheet imprint so it must be the one ( sarcasm). You would think they would grab them all. But if you test them all and they all test positive then you have to assume contamination. Much easier with just one.

Automatic reflex I would think would be to over-collect not under-collect.

 

[MichaelB]

Oggi article translation.

Perugia. Does the truth lie in this forgotten video?

There are 2,068 registered files the evening of the murder and they have never been analysed in depth. In one there is a worrying finding. It has a resounding similarity.

By Giangavino Sulas

In the investigation into the murder of Meredith Kercher there is a DVD, which till now has inexplicably been ignored. It contains 2,068 files made the night of 1st November 2007 by the surveillance telecamera, placed at the entrance to the Sant’Antonio carpark in Perugia. It was seized by the flying squad and consigned to the Scientific Police for analysis of the recorded images for the hours preceeding and following the murder. This telecamera in fact not only captures the entrance to the parking lot, but also the entrance gate to the house in via Della Pergola from across the road. Having finished its work, the Scientific Police, in the account given to the Prosecutor, did not indicate anything relevant, on account of the poor quality of the images and the difficulty in identifying the people taken. And yet there are worrying images taken a little before 10pm, which were missed by the eyes of the enquirers. Very sharp images, among which not only are the people recognisable and potentially identifiable, but all show the same strange behaviour. Between 21.00 and 22.00, the telecamera recorded the entry into the car park of 37 people. All those captured between 21.31 and 21.52 passing the entrance barrier show the same reaction; they stop to look to the left, towards the entrance of the carpark, in other words towards the entrance to Meredith’s house. In several images we see a small family, consisting of father, mother, and two children stop; first the mother turns, then one of the children, then both together. They seem to be discussing something. Finally they go away. The couple who passed before them had the same reaction. What attracted their attention? What was happening during those minutes? Had they heard screams? Had they heard someone screaming for help? Had they seen someone running away? Why were these people not identified and questioned?

In the first trial process the hour of the murder was established based on the evidence of Nara Capezzali, an elderly lady who lived in via Della Pergola (actually strictly incorrect – overlooking it, DCA). She said that she went to sleep at around 21.00, and awoke, for physiological reasons (ie to get up for a pee!, DCA) at around 23.00. She said that on the night of 1st November 2007 when she awoke she heard a harrowing scream. The Perugia Court that condemned Raffaele and Amanda established that the emission of this scream could only have been because Meredith had been stabbed. Had the persons who entered the parking lot heard the same scream, but at a different time (ie from that stated by Capezzali)? Opening a new inquiry the investigators should be able to identify and question them.

Was this a dereliction of duty?
Then there is an image which could change the fate of Amanda. It shows a girl with a shoulder bag and a calm expression who has passed the entrance barrier of the carpark, from where one can pass to the old centre of the city. If this was really Amanda, this picture would become her alibi. It provides the time as indicated on the same telecamera; 20.53. In reality the exact time is different, 21.05, because the time recorded throughout is 12 minutes early. But the English student was murdered between 21.00 and 22.30. This was established in the last judgement of the Appeal Court of Assizes of Florence. Amanda therefore would have been going away from her house five minutes after Meredith’s return. For this reason she could not have taken part in the murder, cleaned herself up and washed, and got back to the Piazza Grimana, where then the tramp Antonio Curatolo saw her, in the company of Raffaele, from 21.30 to 23.30. In order to accuse her once more it would be necessary to change the time of the murder. And if the tramp Antonio Curatolo remains a credible witness, as the Court in Florence maintained, Meredith’s murder has to be moved forward by at least three hours. In fact it would be necessary to do the whole trial again. But in order to redo the trial the Prosecutor of Perugia would need first to open the investigation by reason of dereliction of duty by the Police, to explore why these other pictures, which we are publishing exclusively, were never shown to the examining magistrates by the Scientific Police, who had been given the task of examining the contents of that telecamera. Will they do this? The prosecutors Giuliano Mignini and Manuela Comodi for now prefer silence.

If instead the girl caught on camera at 21.05 was not Amanda, this image would not invalidate her alibi: she and Raffaele have in fact always maintained that they never went out that night. They did not go to via Della Percola, nor to the centre or any local place. They watched a film on the computer, smoked a joint, made love and went to sleep. If they had gone into Meredith’s house they could not have avoided the telecamera of the Sant’Antonio carpark, just as didn’t Guede or for the same reason Meredith did not do.

‘Oggi’, in November 20121, already published an image from 21.00 on November 1st, in which one sees a girl with a white jacket like Meredith’s who is going towards via della Pergola. In two other cameras they caught at 19.40 and 20.10, a man who could have been Rudy Guede, leaving the carpark towards the house of the murder, which, by his own admission, he entered at 20.30, half an hour before Meredith arrived. How he entered the flat, the President of the Court of Florence did not know, and he has said that it is unimportant. The return of the English girl at 21.00 was confirmed by the testimony of her friend Sophie Purton who accompanied her for part of the way (home). Also in those videos there is no trace of Amanda and Raffaele