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

[RandyN]

Randy I've made it quite clear that I defer to others on DNA.

I would think a short very elementary description of what is wrong with the two key pieces of evidence (clasp and knife) would be useful. Maybe the defense could use parts of it in their appeal.

It would be great to cover this from collection to testing. 1. I would like to know how Meredith's DNA could have found it's way to the knife without any other DNA being on it. 2. What do the negative control tests tell us. 3. Clearly there is something there that shouldn't be but how does it turn into Meredith's DNA and only hers? Before someone that is reading comprehensively challenged starts bleating about this, I realize that those tests needed to be thrown out that were done at that time. Remember if the presentation is to work in Italy contamination must be explained, at least a little.

What does it mean that Stefanoni stopped using one machine? Did the DNA she found actually match Meredith or did she match alleles she knew Meredith had?

4.Certainly the quality of the work does not rise to the level of evidence but I would like to see it shown in the most basic language possible.

1. Well that one is easy. No MK DNA was ever found on the knife blade. In fact that test was invalid for a number of reasons plus it also points to corrupt acts occurring with all the subterfuge and denial of raw data, the forgetting of notes, the loss and attempted insertion of false control data sheets into the court record. I mean how many wrong things have to occur to just this one sample before it is killed as the fake that it is?

Oh do I need to mention it was a one off, LTN/LCN, too low sample, invented in a lab not qualified, trained, or equipped to test LTN/LCN samples? And then processed on a machine not designed to test such samples in those parameters with a kit also not designed and therefore exempt from being used on such sized samples....and yet!!!!

The contention that "something" was found is not valid. If something was actually found that resembles MK DNA then it was only from contamination or corruption because this is not how the science is done anywhere in the world...not even really in Italy I suspect...except for this one case.

We should easily be able to find 1000 DNA scientists to invalidate this work meanwhile I cant imagine they can find one non Italian who claims it is valid...well there is that one idiot in GB but I suspect he is related to Pervert Quinell somehow.

2. The negative control tests prove without doubt that contamination was a certainty. There is no other interpretation.


3. It does not! See number 1. There is no MK DNA anywhere on this knife and there never was...no matter how many times Stefanoni shows you the one picture she created...it is not DNA of MK. Does this picture reveal MK contamination in the test process? Maybe...but I doubt that is even true. It is just impossible to say and only the weakest of speculation to say this is MK DNA. You cant start for the position that this is a real and valid test, with a valid finding of MK...because it is not and never was.


4. Well that's the problem isn't it. The defense failed miserably to invalidate what was never a reasonable test result. Why they did that I have no clue. Perhaps they never expected this case to actually pass the many smell tests it amazingly whizzed right thru... But this is bad science. It is easily proved bad science. I cant understand how the Italian courts ignore this absurd science. I cant figure out why the whole DNA scientific community is not decrying this work...they are making themselves all look foolish. Heck, I don't trust regular dripping gobs of fresh DNA testing anymore. Between Italy followed very closely by the Canadian crack DNA lab abominations I am beginning to think that the science is rather old west rough and tumble confused and bastardized to do whatever you want affairs. The certifying bodies appear to have lost control. How else can they sit and ignore this misuse of the science...and have no doubt....this is not even close to doing things the properly defined and approved way. Not in Italy and not in Canada certainly...probably not in USA either.

Lets ask Hampikan.

 

[anglolawyer]

But but .... apart from all that [ minor details really ] they got the big picture right surely.

Correct me if I am wrong but

1. Manders is hawt, white and american.

2. RG is black

3. Italians are (dusky) foreigners

4. .. as was the victim.

Case closed (as they apparently say in Italian). No ?

Stilicho's list is a keeper. I particularly like 'Sollecito has an impeccable track record'. P Quennell has assembled such a crowd of thick sods. Sollecito is a person of good character, maybe, or Sollecito is a normal young man. I suggest either instead and offer to draft TJMK's lists of these things hereafter. Lists are good.

Meanwhile, TAKE NOTICE that, by right of mockery, I am purloining the phrase for personal use. 'Sollecito has an impeccable track record' is now my intellectual property. It's in my wheelhouse. TJMK may continue to use it only with permission, hereby granted in perpetuity.

 

[anglolawyer]

1. Well that one is easy. No MK DNA was ever found on the knife blade. In fact that test was invalid for a number of reasons plus it also points to corrupt acts occurring with all the subterfuge and denial of raw data, the forgetting of notes, the loss and attempted insertion of false control data sheets into the court record. I mean how many wrong things have to occur to just this one sample before it is killed as the fake that it is?

Oh do I need to mention it was a one off, LTN/LCN, too low sample, invented in a lab not qualified, trained, or equipped to test LTN/LCN samples? And then processed on a machine not designed to test such samples in those parameters with a kit also not designed and therefore exempt from being used on such sized samples....and yet!!!!

The contention that "something" was found is not valid. If something was actually found that resembles MK DNA then it was only from contamination or corruption because this is not how the science is done anywhere in the world...not even really in Italy I suspect...except for this one case.

We should easily be able to find 1000 DNA scientists to invalidate this work meanwhile I cant imagine they can find one non Italian who claims it is valid...well there is that one idiot in GB but I suspect he is related to Pervert Quinell somehow.

2. The negative control tests prove without doubt that contamination was a certainty. There is no other interpretation.


3. It does not! See number 1. There is no MK DNA anywhere on this knife and there never was...no matter how many times Stefanoni shows you the one picture she created...it is not DNA of MK. Does this picture reveal MK contamination in the test process? Maybe...but I doubt that is even true. It is just impossible to say and only the weakest of speculation to say this is MK DNA. You cant start for the position that this is a real and valid test, with a valid finding of MK...because it is not and never was.


4. Well that's the problem isn't it. The defense failed miserably to invalidate what was never a reasonable test result. Why they did that I have no clue. Perhaps they never expected this case to actually pass the many smell tests it amazingly whizzed right thru... But this is bad science. It is easily proved bad science. I cant understand how the Italian courts ignore this absurd science. I cant figure out why the whole DNA scientific community is not decrying this work...they are making themselves all look foolish. Heck, I don't trust regular dripping gobs of fresh DNA testing anymore. Between Italy followed very closely by the Canadian crack DNA lab abominations I am beginning to think that the science is rather old west rough and tumble confused and bastardized to do whatever you want affairs. The certifying bodies appear to have lost control. How else can they sit and ignore this misuse of the science...and have no doubt....this is not even close to doing things the properly defined and approved way. Not in Italy and not in Canada certainly...probably not in USA either.

Lets ask Hampikan.

What Randy said. The idea there was anything on the blade is tenacious but all the tests we eventually came to know about, as a result of disclosure ordered by Massei in the teeth of opposition, prove there was nothing. Likewise, the storage of the clasp in a manner which could only destroy it as evidence leaves only the word of a lying slob to prove anything was ever on it.

And then there is my pi to 10 places analogy which is always met with total silence, leaving me to wonder whether I'm the only one who gets it or folks are just being polite

 

[Desert Fox]

Figure in 99% of cases involving DNA, the evidence is properly extracted and I have been looking at a number of cases where they ask if the individual who left a DNA sample had a valid reason. Some jurisdictions are more cautious than others. Full disclosure and ability to retest the sames seem to be the best recourse.

Still, I have to wonder if older DNA testing may have been safer in some cases, when they didn't have the technology to multiply the DNA sample. When you have a significant DNA semen sample, I think it is pretty safe.

There is starting to be some use of trickery with DNA by criminals as well. The Yellowstone murder actually paid a kid to spit in a cup and used it to seal an envelope.

I don't think we should give up on DNA evidence, just that it is not a magic wand but is imperfect just like everything else.

 

[Samson]

What Randy said. The idea there was anything on the blade is tenacious but all the tests we eventually came to know about, as a result of disclosure ordered by Massei in the teeth of opposition, prove there was nothing. Likewise, the storage of the clasp in a manner which could only destroy it as evidence leaves only the word of a lying slob to prove anything was ever on it.

And then there is my pi to 10 places analogy which is always met with total silence, leaving me to wonder whether I'm the only one who gets it or folks are just being polite

Repost the pi quote if you can find it Anglo, I am soon to post an idea that everyone will probably ignore too.

 

[anglolawyer]

Repost the pi quote if you can find it Anglo, I am soon to post an idea that everyone will probably ignore too.

Sigh. It's all here.

 

[platonov]

“Indeed Sir, but you are better informed”

I know of none. I know that there are guilters here who could enlighten us. They never do.

You could try reading the thread and various docs but I'm not sure it would help.

The groupie conundrum is perhaps best summed up by the age old response to the common complaint that the listener 'is none the wiser'.

“Indeed Sir, but you are better informed”

 

[Bill Williams]

Are there any forensic experts besides those in the Italian Police Force who argue that the forensic export supports guilt?

I know of none. I know that there are guilters here who could enlighten us. They never do.

You could try reading the thread and various docs but I'm not sure it would help.

The groupie conundrum is perhaps best summed up by the age old response to the common complaint that the listener 'is none the wiser'.

“Indeed Sir, but you are better informed”

If there was one you'd provide it. Otherwise, all you have is ad hominem.

 

[anglolawyer]

You could try reading the thread and various docs but I'm not sure it would help.

The groupie conundrum is perhaps best summed up by the age old response to the common complaint that the listener 'is none the wiser'.

“Indeed Sir, but you are better informed”

The groupthink mentality is all on your side of the fence, where dissentients are banned merely for expressing a contrary opinion. The long term effects are worthy of study in themselves. The answer to Bill's question is none: there is no relevant expertise on the PGP side. All they have is Balding who has nothing to say about contamination, and Thoughtful who refuses to countenance fraud because, well, it never happens, does it? She thinks the result validates the process and is thus wrong on at least two separate levels. And, er, that's it.

 

[Bill Williams]

The groupthink mentality is all on your side of the fence, where dissentients are banned merely for expressing a contrary opinion. The long term effects are worthy of study in themselves. The answer to Bill's question is none: there is no relevant expertise on the PGP side. All they have is Balding who has nothing to say about contamination, and Thoughtful who refuses to countenance fraud because, well, it never happens, does it? She thinks the result validates the process and is thus wrong on at least two separate levels. And, er, that's it.

But what about Peter Quennell's 100s of lawyers? Or Michael (from PMF.NET)'s bleach receipt?

I'm afraid Platonov has you there!

 

[Bill Williams]

I know of none. I know that there are guilters here who could enlighten us. They never do.

You could try reading the thread and various docs but I'm not sure it would help.

The groupie conundrum is perhaps best summed up by the age old response to the common complaint that the listener 'is none the wiser'.

“Indeed Sir, but you are better informed”

All you response has accomplished is to make sure my claim is repeated in front of lurkers who may be new to this, and proves that you don't have one....\\So, innocenters should be grateful for your <return> key. Innocenters never are. All they do is re-repeat the claim, and around and around we go....

But thanks for replying and keeping the claim alive without refuting it.

 

[Desert Fox]

If there was one you'd provide it. Otherwise, all you have is ad hominem.

I notice that when debating certain people, they will often respond that they already addressed that point. They then call you lazy for not finding a certain post without even providing a post number. Usually find that they never did actually address your point.

 

[Samson]

Sigh. It's all here.

3.14159 26535

When asked for the method the student produces some meaningless scraps of paper. When pressed it turns out he used a computer but cannot or will not furnish a log of what operations were conducted on that computer.

Good work Anglo. I do actually follow your post. My father was a mathematician and explained pi on a dining room table. He drew a circle and made tiny segments, probably resolved by calculus, and it made sense. I will hope you critique my post, which I am perfecting. Black humour, but serious intent.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

effacing the evidence

Did the forensic police completely wipe away some of the bloody shoe prints in the hallway, or did they wipe away all of them? Was it ever explained why they collected them in this manner?

 

[anglolawyer]

3.14159 26535

When asked for the method the student produces some meaningless scraps of paper. When pressed it turns out he used a computer but cannot or will not furnish a log of what operations were conducted on that computer.

Good work Anglo. I do actually follow your post. My father was a mathematician and explained pi on a dining room table. He drew a circle and made tiny segments, probably resolved by calculus, and it made sense. I will hope you critique my post, which I am perfecting. Black humour, but serious intent.

I bet your mother was peeved at having pi scratched all over her table! Lol. Thank you for your understanding. I feel less like a loon than before. I await your own scratchings anon.

 

[Samson]

You could try reading the thread and various docs but I'm not sure it would help.

The groupie conundrum is perhaps best summed up by the age old response to the common complaint that the listener 'is none the wiser'.

“Indeed Sir, but you are better informed”

Sir is a great Victorian form of address. Sir Platonov, I pray you will participate in the game that will sort the sheep from the goats. I am not trying to trump you for obscure turns of phrase.

 

[Samson]

I bet your mother was peeved at having pi scratched all over her table! Lol. Thank you for your understanding. I feel less like a loon than before. I await your own scratchings anon.

You won't be disappointed, simply because the internal logic of the game is consistent. My idea must ultimately be driven by Christopher Brookmyre, and his fictional creation Simon Darcourt.

I will perfect and post inside 7 days.

 

[Dan O.]

Did the forensic police completely wipe away some of the bloody shoe prints in the hallway, or did they wipe away all of them? Was it ever explained why they collected them in this manner?

We see them on video wiping away the prints at markers 2 and 3 in the hall. And on the return in Devember they spend considerable time searching for where the prints had been in the bedroom. But there is no evidence that they even saw the print by the pink bag at the entrance to the hall.

In an era when DNA processing wasn't as efficient, it was necessary to gather as much of the stain as possible to insure a profile could be developed. Their actions here are inconsistent with their beliefe that they can develope a profile from an invisible stain hidden in an invisible scratch.

 

[Grinder]

I agree with you. What kind of crowd was at the police station that kept CT from formally reporting the crime? The story is Rudy pulled a knife on CT. If CT had gone to the station he would be angry enough about the break-in and knife to make the report. I don't believe he went and then abandoned his mission.

I have no way to know if he went or not. But he could have gone and found all the people in line that had been victims of Rudi's crime wave . Now if it wasn't Rudi's crime wave maybe it was others that had been robbed by other thieves.

I see a crowd all holding 10 lbs rocks and pictures of second story windows.

Certainly I can agree that he would have to explain why he didn't bother to make the report, but that doesn't explain why he didn't call them when he identified Rudi at Domus.

I do think it is absurd to believe that in a town as big as Perugia that a rock through a window could be known to be one person's MO and if he was "working" for the police that they would allow him to do burglaries.

 

[Grinder]

I find it believable. In my opinion his testimony would work strongly in favour of A and R because threatening with knives is in reality quite uncommon, and powerfully points to Rudy as Meredith's killer, and make Nencini's report putting knives in the hands of others challengeable.

Except his testimony wasn't credible and only identified Rudi after his picture was in the paper. Now what is interesting is that NO ONE seems to have gone after the bouncer at the club that supposedly banned Rudi.

I agree that if CT's story was verified it would be very powerful to this day. If I were on the greater defense team (lawyers and PR), I would go find the people CT told about Rudi BEFORE his picture was in the paper. I would also like to know how CT's guy entered his flat.