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

[Bill Williams]

Sadly if this is the best case for guilt after seven years of contemplation, a list of innuendo, disinformation and out right lies all you have convinced me of is that there is no case. Still I guess you work on the premise that if you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.

Sadly, guilters do believe that this is compelling. Stilicho also makes mention of Judge Nencini's "compelling reasoning", and yet does not respond AT ALL to this part of Nencini's reasoning. Until a guilter responds, then there is no real reason to accept Nencini's guilty verdict, other than that he was directed by the ISC to find them guilty.

​

I am going to post this until there's at least one response which makes the case why Nencini's reasoning that women have Y-Haplotypes is "compelling".

 

[acbytesla]

An unpublished alleged article found on the PIP/FOA site with no sources or footnotes.

Guede was named a suspect by the woman whose house was burned down, we may surmise (Grinder permitting) it's Rudy's neighbor (it was her gold watch Rudy was found with in Milan), but she asked not to be named in this article by Graham.

Your assumption is that the framing is in response to the embarrassment of having arrested three wrong people (PL, AK, RS). I disagree. Mignini had troubles and reasons for making it a conspiracy before Guede got pulled into the picture, whether they recognized Guede immediately or not.

So we have two points of disagreement. Did the police recognize Guede's MO at the crime scene on day 1 (I say yes).

And secondly, did Mignini have other reasons to make the murder a group - satanic - orgy - halloween - cult murder act, rather than a lone killer, on Day 1. (I say yes here too. And so does Psychic medium Gabriella Carlizzi and her ghostly compadre Father Gabriel, the deceased Vatican priest and exorcist who provided her with 'illuminations').

And a follow-up to the second point, did Mignini act on those reasons to frame the crime as a group effort focusing on Knox, and if so, then when? (Again, I'm on board for yes, and early. The interrogations required advance planning, and the lab results are cooked).

Guede was named a suspect by the woman whose house was burned down, we may surmise (Grinder permitting) it's Rudy's neighbor (it was her gold watch Rudy was found with in Milan), but she asked not to be named in this article by Graham.

Your assumption is that the framing is in response to the embarrassment of having arrested three wrong people (PL, AK, RS). I disagree. Mignini had troubles and reasons for making it a conspiracy before Guede got pulled into the picture, whether they recognized Guede immediately or not.

So we have two points of disagreement. Did the police recognize Guede's MO at the crime scene on day 1 (I say yes).

And secondly, did Mignini have other reasons to make the murder a group - satanic - orgy - halloween - cult murder act, rather than a lone killer, on Day 1. (I say yes here too. And so does Psychic medium Gabriella Carlizzi and her ghostly compadre Father Gabriel, the deceased Vatican priest and exorcist who provided her with 'illuminations').

And a follow-up to the second point, did Mignini act on those reasons to frame the crime as a group effort focusing on Knox, and if so, then when? (Again, I'm on board for yes, and early. The interrogations required advance planning, and the lab results are cooked).

I disagree with Grinder a lot...anyone lurking at this site would be able to confirm that.

That said, I think it is wild out of the blue speculation that the police would be able to recognize Rudy's MO on day one. Throwing a rock through a window is a common burglary trick, hardly patented by Rudy Guede. And as much as I think Rudy probably burglarized his next door neighbor there is no real proof of that.

Other than Ms Diaz insistence that RG probably burglarized her home there really nothing except the possible link to a gold watch that is missing. Does being the neighbor of someone who is burglarized make them a suspect? While I think it might be possible that detectives might even believe Rudy did this, they have nothing to be able to go forward with that suspicion. No witnesses, no DNA, no fingerprints.

 

[Grinder]

Guede was named a suspect by the woman whose house was burned down, we may surmise (Grinder permitting) it's Rudy's neighbor (it was her gold watch Rudy was found with in Milan), but she asked not to be named in this article by Graham.

Her name is supposed to be Diaz according to Nina. No one, even Nina, claims that the watch was matched to her lost watch. Please tell us when and in which paper this story was published.

Your assumption is that the framing is in response to the embarrassment of having arrested three wrong people (PL, AK, RS). I disagree. Mignini had troubles and reasons for making it a conspiracy before Guede got pulled into the picture, whether they recognized Guede immediately or not.

It is you that is making assumptions. It is absurd to suggest that Mignini and Napoleoni (wasn't it she you earlier suggested recognized Rudi's MO immediately or was that someone else?) would frame Amanda and Raf the first day, absurd. They wouldn't know if they had alibis or in some other ways would prove their innocence. They wouldn't have known what DNA etc. would turn up.

So we have two points of disagreement. Did the police recognize Guede's MO at the crime scene on day 1 (I say yes).

Do people in Perugia register their MOs? It was a rock through a window, hardly unique. Even the most pro Rudi being a crime wave only name one other burglary that resembled the cottage break in.

And secondly, did Mignini have other reasons to make the murder a group - satanic - orgy - halloween - cult murder act, rather than a lone killer, on Day 1. (I say yes here too. And so does Psychic medium Gabriella Carlizzi and her ghostly compadre Father Gabriel, the deceased Vatican priest and exorcist who provided her with 'illuminations').

You will not be able to give credible cites for the above.

And a follow-up to the second point, did Mignini act on those reasons to frame the crime as a group effort focusing on Knox, and if so, then when? (Again, I'm on board for yes, and early. The interrogations required advance planning, and the lab results are cooked).

The lab work may have been "cooked" but that doesn't begin to back up the absurd claim that the PLE decided to frame the kids the first day.

You really seem like a sock puppet from the dark side trying to make this discussion look ridiculous.

 

[Grinder]

Here is one where the evidence seems good. . . .I don't think it was LCN though.

"Woman in Box"

There is a woman found in a large Tupperware style storage container.
He calls the police after he opened the box after he smelled something coming from it.
He knows the woman and claims to be storing the box of the man who used to be a roommate of the woman in the box.
Though the use of DNA, the crime lab determined that the duct tape on the initially unopened sides of the box had skin cells from the roommate. Seems to be a pretty solid case to me.

Yes but those were skin cells on the tape that sealed the box. Even though it was LCN it is hard to explain how it got there accidentally. The problem comes when they look in random places at a crime scene and find LCN DNA from a person that might have left it there or from secondary transfer.

 

[carbonjam72]

Skepticant

I disagree with Grinder a lot...anyone lurking at this site would be able to confirm that.

That said, I think it is wild out of the blue speculation that the police would be able to recognize Rudy's MO on day one. Throwing a rock through a window is a common burglary trick, hardly patented by Rudy Guede. And as much as I think Rudy probably burglarized his next door neighbor there is no real proof of that.

Other than Ms Diaz insistence that RG probably burglarized her home there really nothing except the possible link to a gold watch that is missing. Does being the neighbor of someone who is burglarized make them a suspect? While I think it might be possible that detectives might even believe Rudy did this, they have nothing to be able to go forward with that suspicion. No witnesses, no DNA, no fingerprints.

According to the article by Graham, the woman made a complaint to the police and was certain Rudy was responsible. (I'm sure i've seen in other reports that Rudy was watching her pack up and go away for the weekend).

She made a complaint, told the police it was Rudy, and the police did nothing. That doesn't mean there was no evidence, it means the police did nothing. Not having evidence, and no one looking for evidence, isn't quite the same thing.

Sure its easy to be skeptical and play devil's advocate and say Rudy didn't do it. But what all of the people who have told similar stories would all have to be wrong - the milan police, the neighbor Diaz, CT and the knife, the nursery school in Milan...

It takes a lot of mental effort to disconnect these events, but occam's razor unites them, imo.

 

[Desert Fox]

Yes but those were skin cells on the tape that sealed the box. Even though it was LCN it is hard to explain how it got there accidentally. The problem comes when they look in random places at a crime scene and find LCN DNA from a person that might have left it there or from secondary transfer.

To be clear, I don't think it was LCN but think it was just normal STR amplification.
Interesting that they assumed that the person storing the box would have his DNA on the outside and the tape he pulled off the box.

 

[Grinder]

According to the article by Graham, the woman made a complaint to the police and was certain Rudy was responsible. (I'm sure i've seen in other reports that Rudy was watching her pack up and go away for the weekend).

Other reports, like on a discussion board? There is no credible source for anything except Rudi being caught in Milan with a gold watch that Prato said was stolen but even that has never been verified.

Once again it isn't an article. It is a posting on a PIP/FOA site.

She made a complaint, told the police it was Rudy, and the police did nothing. That doesn't mean there was no evidence, it means the police did nothing. Not having evidence, and no one looking for evidence, isn't quite the same thing.

The story was that a fire was caused by a scarf put over a lamp and the police were able to find her at some festival. She didn't need to report the event and there has never been anything produced that verified any of this.

Sure its easy to be skeptical and play devil's advocate and say Rudy didn't do it. But what all of the people who have told similar stories would all have to be wrong - the milan police, the neighbor Diaz, CT and the knife, the nursery school in Milan...

It takes a lot of mental effort to disconnect these events, but occam's razor unites them, imo.

Occam's razor has nothing to do with this. Occam is beginning to be like Godwin's law. When all else fails bring up the trump card of Occam.

Milan definitely happened. He was caught in the nursery that had no signs of a break in and he didn't bring a knife. CT for good reason wasn't allowed to testify. The neighbor Diaz is a figment of Nina's imagination until some actual proof is produced.

It takes little effort to be skeptical of stories that don't have multiple sources and other stories that don't make sense. It is not credible that CT identified Rudi and had called the police initially yet didn't bother to tell them it was Rudi until after he was the murderer.

I don't believe Nara, Curatolo or Quintavalle either.

You do realize that the argument that with all this evidence he must be a one man crime wave is just like the ILE and PGP saying that evidence shouldn't be examined piece by piece but as a whole.

 

[acbytesla]

According to the article by Graham, the woman made a complaint to the police and was certain Rudy was responsible. (I'm sure i've seen in other reports that Rudy was watching her pack up and go away for the weekend).

She made a complaint, told the police it was Rudy, and the police did nothing. That doesn't mean there was no evidence, it means the police did nothing. Not having evidence, and no one looking for evidence, isn't quite the same thing.

Sure its easy to be skeptical and play devil's advocate and say Rudy didn't do it. But what all of the people who have told similar stories would all have to be wrong - the milan police, the neighbor Diaz, CT and the knife, the nursery school in Milan...

It takes a lot of mental effort to disconnect these events, but occam's razor unites them, imo.

I don't disagree with any or all of that. I think Rudy absolutely probably burglarized Ms. Diaz's home. That it wasn't thoroughly investigated isn't necessarily surprising either. That happens all the time in jurisdictions all over. I think the weight of all this points to Rudy...But I don't think we can prove it. Perhaps if the Perugian authorities had actually done their job, we might...but they didn't.

 

[Strozzi]

Brilliant! Seriously a very good analogy. [qimg]http://www.emofaces.com/en/emoticons/t/tip-of-the-hat-emoticon.gif[/qimg]

Let me, a scientific idiot, try my hand at structuring an example. A basketball player is at the far end of a basketball court. Someone turns off the lights, plunging the court into darkness. When the lights come back on 30 seconds later the player is at the opposite end of the court and the ball is descending through the net. Should he be credited with scoring two points? He says he should because the ball came through the net. He obtained the result - ball went through the net.

An opposing player says he should not be credited for it because nobody could see how he ran with the ball to the other end of the court. He has not shown that he got from point A to point B properly. Did he dribble his way downcourt properly? Did he stay in-bound properly? Did he have help from someone in the stands? Did he switch the ball with another, accidentally or deliberately in the dark? Did he arrange for the lights to be turned off at that moment so others could not see what he did?

Let's ask the ref. Ref Nencini says he likes the result and he awards a win. Ref EHCR says the way the player got from one end of the court to the other was not observed - it was obscured, possibly deliberately - and we have no way to know that the method he used to get the result is correct and reliable.

 

[Grinder]

To be clear, I don't think it was LCN but think it was just normal STR amplification.
Interesting that they assumed that the person storing the box would have his DNA on the outside and the tape he pulled off the box.

Of course the storer would have his DNA on the outside and on the tape he removed. I assumed that they found the roommate's DNA on the sticky side.

I also assume you were talking about LCN because that had been the subject. The issues with LCN is that it needs to be clear that it wasn't from some innocent source or transfer.

 

[Bill Williams]

Stilicho has kindly introduced us to "Nencini's compelling reasoning". Please consider the photo below, as well as Nencini's stellar, compelling reasoning why this is Amanda Knox's footprint, most probably in Meredith's blood.

​

Nencini's "compelling" reasoning is that even though Luminol reacts to many things, the presumed footprint must be Knox's and must be seen as incriminating because....

...... this is a crime of a stabbing that produced blood, so what other substance could this be other than blood? Luminol (producing the glow in the photo) is only a presumptive test, but at this sort of crime what else can it be? (With no further testing this is Nencini's reasoning)

What has subsequently been pointed out to me, is that this hallway stain was also tested with the confirmatory test (TMB), and tested negative for blood.

Therefore, regardless of what it is comprised of, a responsible court should not simply declare it to be blood against the evidence.

But please also note the glow from just about everything there.... including the Scientific Policeperson's booties as well as the tape measure. Have all of them been splattered with blood, too? Does this suggest that the crime scene is being contaminated by the very Scientific Police who've taken precautions against so doing (presumably by donning those suits to begin with)?

This is how crazy these guilty verdicts are. Yet guilters still talk about "compelling evidence", esp. from the Nencini court.

ETA - what is also missing from this are the characteristic swirls produced by an attempted clean-up..... so much for the finding of guilt for a clean-up....

 

[carbonjam72]

Grinderstan

Other reports, like on a discussion board? There is no credible source for anything except Rudi being caught in Milan with a gold watch that Prato said was stolen but even that has never been verified.

Once again it isn't an article. It is a posting on a PIP/FOA site.



The story was that a fire was caused by a scarf put over a lamp and the police were able to find her at some festival. She didn't need to report the event and there has never been anything produced that verified any of this.



Occam's razor has nothing to do with this. Occam is beginning to be like Godwin's law. When all else fails bring up the trump card of Occam.

Milan definitely happened. He was caught in the nursery that had no signs of a break in and he didn't bring a knife. CT for good reason wasn't allowed to testify. The neighbor Diaz is a figment of Nina's imagination until some actual proof is produced.

It takes little effort to be skeptical of stories that don't have multiple sources and other stories that don't make sense. It is not credible that CT identified Rudi and had called the police initially yet didn't bother to tell them it was Rudi until after he was the murderer.

I don't believe Nara, Curatolo or Quintavalle either.

You do realize that the argument that with all this evidence he must be a one man crime wave is just like the ILE and PGP saying that evidence shouldn't be examined piece by piece but as a whole.

Are Preston/Spezi from the Monster of Florence acceptable as sources? If Nina Burleigh is not acceptable as a source, then who is?

There are people who've written on this case whose work I have trouble with because their views seem so biased out of the gate.

But if you don't accept any source, short of trial transcripts, than what's left? Who do you rely on, if any?

 

[Desert Fox]

I don't disagree with any or all of that. I think Rudy absolutely probably burglarized Ms. Diaz's home. That it wasn't thoroughly investigated isn't necessarily surprising either. That happens all the time in jurisdictions all over. I think the weight of all this points to Rudy...But I don't think we can prove it. Perhaps if the Perugian authorities had actually done their job, we might...but they didn't.

I believe in the defenses case, it is credible enough to be used as an argument for the defense but not strong enough to prosecute Rudy. Different level of proof in the situation.

 

[Grinder]

Are Preston/Spezi from the Monster of Florence acceptable as sources? If Nina Burleigh is not acceptable as a source, then who is?

There are people who've written on this case whose work I have trouble with because their views seem so biased out of the gate.

But if you don't accept any source, short of trial transcripts, than what's left? Who do you rely on, if any?

Stories that are written at the time that can be questioned in real time have a different value than a True Crime Novel without ANY backing. The police report would be a start. Descriptions of the gold watch from both sources (Prato and Diaz) separately would help. An actual interview with Diaz or the tapes/transcripts of the interview by Nina.

Did Spezi and Preston write about the Diaz burglary and if so what was their source? If it was Nina then no their writing on this would be suspect.

Do you accept Vogt or Barbie as single sources? I did accept Barbie's account on Meredith being cited for public intoxication without a second source. I figured the Kerchers would have howled if it wasn't true.

I believe your last title was a forum violation.

 

[Strozzi]

I'm of the belief that Stefanoni is inducing contamination through environmental exposure, and/or machine residue, and/or through scaling up noise, and/or through inappropriate DNA profile aided and creative interpretation of DNA data.

I don't believe her results are legit, and I don't think she's just getting lucky. I think she has a bag of tricks and she uses them as needed.
One thing though, is that in the case of trace amounts, low copy single run samples; seems unlikely these are planted because how does one physically 'plant' 4 or 5 cells? Seems to risky to count on.

Seems more likely that transporting samples in the same box, leaving them in the open air in the lab, running through the machine sequentially after a target profile, these kinds of maneuvers where the exact moment is hard to pin down but there's likely to be a 'happy accident' at some point.

Then she just gets rid of anything that isn't happy.

You make two good points among others, CarbonJam72. Stefanoni is experienced. She knows how to run her instruments. I agree Stefanoni has a bag of tricks she uses to process evidence and obtain condemnatory results. She has probably never had her work scrutinized and exposed this way by people looking for errors and slight of hand.

I agree also with your second highlighted thought. I suspect she contaminated her machine with DNA, then ran a test to find the DNA, then stopped using that machine to run the next tests because the machine was contaminated and contamination would have shown up in the next tests if she used same machine again.

 

[Grinder]

I don't disagree with any or all of that. I think Rudy absolutely probably burglarized Ms. Diaz's home. That it wasn't thoroughly investigated isn't necessarily surprising either. That happens all the time in jurisdictions all over. I think the weight of all this points to Rudy...But I don't think we can prove it. Perhaps if the Perugian authorities had actually done their job, we might...but they didn't.

It sure would be nice if you could produce at least the police report. There were no stories found about this crime and human interest story. An old woman was burglarized and her cat was killed but not one little story can be found written at the time.

You weren't paying attention when this all started but the PGP speculated that the kids were able to emulate the lawyers' office burglary because either Rudi had told them about it or they had read it in the local papers.

I don't believe that this kind of home invasion and cat murder wouldn't be investigated. I mean they investigated a prank call and went out to retrieve the phones.

You all really want the Diaz story to be true. You all really want the CT story to be true. You really want his rent to be due. You really want him to be a loner that was spinning out of control. But the evidence doesn't support.

 

[Desert Fox]

You make two good points among others, CarbonJam72. Stefanoni is experienced. She knows how to run her instruments. I agree Stefanoni has a bag of tricks she uses to process evidence and obtain condemnatory results. She has probably never had her work scrutinized and exposed this way by people looking for errors and slight of hand.

I agree also with your second highlighted thought. I suspect she contaminated her machine with DNA, then ran a test to find the DNA, then stopped using that machine to run the next tests because the machine was contaminated and contamination would have shown up in the next tests if she used same machine again.

I think it might be worth investigating if there are any other cases of probable innocence of people who were convicted of crimes based on DNA evidence from her or her lab. Of course, this seems to be exactly what the Italian supreme court seemed to be afraid of.

 

[Bill Williams]

I think it might be worth investigating if there are any other cases of probable innocence of people who were convicted of crimes based on DNA evidence from her or her lab. Of course, this seems to be exactly what the Italian supreme court seemed to be afraid of.

You can bet that the Supreme Court back in March 2013 was sensitive to this point. It had better be careful in pulling back the curtain on DNA analysis from the police labs....

12. - Genetic Investigations -

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.​

 

[Desert Fox]

You can bet that the Supreme Court back in March 2013 was sensitive to this point. It had better be careful in pulling back the curtain on DNA analysis from the police labs....

A court system should never be afraid of the light of day

 

[acbytesla]

It sure would be nice if you could produce at least the police report. There were no stories found about this crime and human interest story. An old woman was burglarized and her cat was killed but not one little story can be found written at the time.

You weren't paying attention when this all started but the PGP speculated that the kids were able to emulate the lawyers' office burglary because either Rudi had told them about it or they had read it in the local papers.

I don't believe that this kind of home invasion and cat murder wouldn't be investigated. I mean they investigated a prank call and went out to retrieve the phones.

You all really want the Diaz story to be true. You all really want the CT story to be true. You really want his rent to be due. You really want him to be a loner that was spinning out of control. But the evidence doesn't support.

The only person who has the police report is Ms. Diaz. And Nina is now in the States.

I get your opinion Grinder. But you might keep in mind that the murder was just a few days later and they really didn't seem like they wanted anything to interfere with the sex game gone awry theory. Everybody's rent is due at the beginning of the month.. I really don't care about that. Frankly, I am very tired of this argument. The evidence that Rudy burglarized Ms. Diaz is anecdotal and we'll never be able to prove it either way. I got it, you don't believe it. You also don't believe CT. You also don't believe that Rudy burglarized the law firm and you think that Rudy paid some guy to sleep at the nursery.

We have a difference of opinion. I don't thing Rudy had been burglarizing places for years. I don't see him as a slick professional. I assume his rent was due, but I have no idea if he had his rent money or not and was desperate. I see him as a marginal beginner...but who knows? Maybe he had been at if for years. I have no evidence either way. You can think Rudy was just a guy with no criminal background burglarizing places if you so want. I see the evidence differently. I see ties to these burglaries but I know I can never prove them.

You can think that I'm just wishful thinking and my bias is all over this. Maybe it is. But I see a burglar who let things get out of hand at the cottage. You see a date that got out of hand and then Rudy "staging" the break in.

We see it differently.. I'm done with this. I'll let others decide.