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

[Samson]

CoulsdonUK - do you think the defense teams should appeal the contention that women have Y-genetic material, a salient point Nencnini used to convict them?

See:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_539715385f07c3dedc.jpg[/qimg]​

Bill Luca Cheli hopes for reversal. You know that, but a compatriot posted this a while ago.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10000690&postcount=5390

I would enjoy a further comment.

Go NZ independent commentary.

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill Luca Cheli hopes for reversal. You know that, but a compatriot posted this a while ago.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10000690&postcount=5390

I would enjoy a further comment.

Go NZ independent commentary.

There is no way, really, to know if PhantomWolf's mini-conspiracy theory is correct.... who knows, maybe Nencini did go home that night to his wife and say behind closed doors, "There, I called their bluff. I put that little tidbit in there about women having Y-genetic material - in order to argue against contamination while avoiding implying Meredith a slut. Those bastards on Cassazione can now stew in their own juices...... that will teach them to screw with Nencini of Florence!"

AFAIK Luca Cheli says that this ruling is so, so bizarre that ISC will have no choice but to reverse it. I wish I could agree.

 

[Samson]

There is no way, really, to know if PhantomWolf's mini-conspiracy theory is correct.... who knows, maybe Nencini did go home that night to his wife and say behind closed doors, "There, I called their bluff. I put that little tidbit in there about women having Y-genetic material - in order to argue against contamination while avoiding implying Meredith a slut. Those bastards on Cassazione can now stew in their own juices...... that will teach them to screw with Nencini of Florence!"

AFAIK Luca Cheli says that this ruling is so, so bizarre that ISC will have no choice but to reverse it. I wish I could agree.

Bill, no one knows who will sort this. Could be me could be you. A millimetre a year for a million years is a kilometre. That makes it a mountain range.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

quite the leap

Interesting responses, I assume neither of you have any interest in the defence appeal, fair enough.

That is a perfectly unwarranted assumption. We have discussed the filing of the appeal on several occasions and have indicated that the defense has 45 days to file it. The discussion here has often touched upon things that the defense teams might use in their appeals. I don't see what else can be said, unless the appeal documents are made public at some point.

 

[Samson]

That is a perfectly unwarranted assumption. We have discussed the filing of the appeal on several occasions and have indicated that the defense has 45 days to file it. The discussion here has often touched upon things that the defense teams might use in their appeals. I don't see what else can be said, unless the appeal documents are made public at some point.

It seems sensible to hope Bongiorno is making good on her analysis of the gross inconsistencies in Nencini. Tragically nothing will save R, Hendry is beyond analysis, and must despair. I pray for all of you somewhat close to the case.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

CoulsdonUK - do you think the defense teams should appeal the contention that women have Y-genetic material, a salient point Nencnini used to convict them?

See:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_539715385f07c3dedc.jpg[/qimg]​

Bill

Would you mind if commented after reading the translated motivations a few times, by the way have you read the translations of the Florence motivations or just the bit you posted?

That is a perfectly unwarranted assumption. We have discussed the filing of the appeal on several occasions and have indicated that the defense has 45 days to file it. The discussion here has often touched upon things that the defense teams might use in their appeals. I don't see what else can be said, unless the appeal documents are made public at some point.

Chris

Is it unwarranted? I haven’t posted but have scanned posts these past few weeks and the discussion has been mainly about evidence. What have I missed, what is the general consensus here as to what should appear in the appeals, aren’t the defence going to make them public?

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill

Would you mind if commented after reading the translated motivations a few times, by the way have you read the translations of the Florence motivations or just the bit you posted?

Whether I mind or not is completely irrelevant. This piece says that Nencini thinks women have Y-genetic material. He uses this belief to discount contamination on the bra-hooks. If women indeed do not have Y-genetic material, then the bra-clasp has been contaminated. It's really that simple.

How many times do you have to read that?

Still - you will not even comment when you've read the translation a few times. Your purpose here is other. You'll simply find another reason to avoid expressing a point of view, all the while saying "guilt-like" things about Sollecito and Knox.

 

[Bill Williams]

dup

 

[Bill Williams]

CoulsdonUK.... maybe in preparation to reading the translations....

Do you believe that those extra two Y-haplotypes on the bra clasp could theoretically belong to women? I mean, forget about Nencini for a second..... is THAT possible?

Surely you don't need to read a translation to have an opinion about that!

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Whether I mind or not is completely irrelevant. This piece says that Nencini thinks women have Y-genetic material. He uses this belief to discount contamination on the bra-hooks. If women indeed do not have Y-genetic material, then the bra-clasp has been contaminated. It's really that simple.
How many times do you have to read that?
Still - you will not even comment when you've read the translation a few times. Your purpose here is other. You'll simply find another reason to avoid expressing a point of view, all the while saying "guilt-like" things about Sollecito and Knox.

Gosh; I have expressed an opinion, I would like to read the translated report, I think it is unwise to pick a paragraph or two then to make a judgement on the entire document; I fail to see how this is “guilt-like”. I wonder why the defence isn’t publishing their appeals this time round.

 

[Bill Williams]

Gosh; I have expressed an opinion, I would like to read the translated report, I think it is unwise to pick one a paragraph or two then to make a judgement on the entire document; I fail to see how this is “guilt-like”. I wonder why the defence isn’t publishing their appeals this time round.

No you don't. You're simply joining the group who thinks it's up to the defence to do something. You have never once mentioned the shortcomings of the various prosecutions....

.... and you actually only need to translate one word "amica" to understand what Nencini is saying in that paragraph.

Even with a full translation that you've read dozens of times, you'll still not express an opinion about whether or not women have Y-haplotypes. You'll still shine the spotlight on the defence as if it is their job to prove innocence or publish things.

 

[CoulsdonUK]

CoulsdonUK.... maybe in preparation to reading the translations....

Do you believe that those extra two Y-haplotypes on the bra clasp could theoretically belong to women? I mean, forget about Nencini for a second..... is THAT possible?

Surely you don't need to read a translation to have an opinion about that!

Do you believe the defence should use what you assert as their main response to overturn the verdict?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

No you don't. You're simply joining the group who thinks it's up to the defence to do something. You have never once mentioned the shortcomings of the various prosecutions....

.... and you actually only need to translate one word "amica" to understand what Nencini is saying in that paragraph.

Even with a full translation that you've read dozens of times, you'll still not express an opinion about whether or not women have Y-haplotypes. You'll still shine the spotlight on the defence as if it is their job to prove innocence or publish things.

Okay, I’m confused, so the defence aren’t going to file an appeal? Isn’t the defence function to appeal the Florence verdict?

I haven’t read the Florence motivations report.

So you would walk into the final appeal hearing armed with this assertion, that’s it.

 

[Matthew Best]

So you would walk into the final appeal hearing armed with this assertion, that’s it.

The famous argument of "so". Automatic fail, I'm afraid.

 

[Bill Williams]

Do you believe the defence should use what you assert as their main response to overturn the verdict?

No.

 

[carbonjam72]

On Precedents...

BTW, for those breathlessly following Bond v. US to see if it would have any potential impact on extradition matters, in the sense that the Court might say that the US government cannot enter into a treaty that abrogates individual rights . . . well, the opinion is out and the majority pretty much avoided that issue (not surprising). But, there is some discussion of the issue in the concurrences:



In other words, Justice Scalia thinks its as obvious as the nose on your face that no treaty can take away any citizen's "constitutionally protected individual rights."

So, I ask, does an innocent American citizen have a right not to be snatched up off the street and sent away for life imprisonment by a corrupt foreign power that has railroaded the citizen in a biased, unfair kangaroo-court proceeding?

Well, when you put it that way...

Come to think of it, do corrupt prosecutors have the right to snatch US citizens up off their own streets in their countries of jurisdiction, based on trumped up charges, and railroaded show trials, send them to jail for what they hope will be decades, an then just walk away? Or should they be tried for kidnapping, wrongful imprisonment, etc, who even knows how to characterize the crimes committed against AK & RS?

 

[carbonjam72]

New ISC Judges?

Clearly Luca Cheli is now the most authentic contributor, as an Italian speaker and critical analyst of both the science and the psychology. There is no god above, so let's hope Luca is right in proposing that the completely random new judges behave themselves.

Are there 5 new randomly chosen judges?

That's good news, at least to some degree.

 

[Bill Williams]

This is the deal about Nencini's treatment of the bra-clasp.

Nencini needs to defeat the notion that there is contamination on that clasp. Why? Well, because there are five somewhat partial profiles of DNA (one female and four male), and to convict Nencini needs to show that Raffaele's profile is:

1) on the clasp
2) there for a non-innocent reason.​

.... and that the rest are there for innocent reason.

The first sample is Meredith's, obvious there for an innocent and explainable reason.

The second sample is a Y-Haplotype. Because of its make-up, Rudy Guede can be ruled out. However, Raffaele belongs to a group of men which does fit that profile. So it cannot be said to positively I.D. him, but it cannot be ruled out.

So far, Nencini is echoing the Massei report published in 2010. Yet Nencini does something one would think he shouldn't do, not with Cassazione in Mar 2103 overturning the acquittals. Part of the reason why Cassazione did that was because they found fault with Hellmann relying upon Conti-Vecchiotti's DNA analysis which trashed Police lab's Stefanoni's report - a report which was accepted in total, completely uncritically by Massei in 2010.

Nencini, though, does something strange - he accepts the findings of Conti-Vecchiotti in relation to the clasp!!!! Nencini concedes that there are four identifiable extra male-samples: three plus a group of men where Raffaelecannot be ruled out. Nencini implicitly brings Conti-Vecchiotti back from the dead!

So - the third sample is also Y-genetic material. No one knows who it belongs to - no control/comparative-samples were taken at the scene. But remember, Nencini is trying to argue that all the rest of these clasp samples were there by innocent means.

So without testing it, Nencini invents out of whole cloth, pulls out of thin air that this sample MUST be Meredith's boyfriend's. Why? Well, if it isn't then there's a third unknown male in the room at the time of the murder, or....

..... there's contamination. So Nencini just makes it up, invents it: that it is Meredith's boyfriend's/ And why not..... she was sexually active and being a responsible adult even borrow contraception from Knox, her flatmate.

But wait a minute. Nencini has implicitly brought C&V back from Cassazione-death. There are two more male DNA samples on that clasp. And Nencini has to find some sort of explanation for them being there which:

1) is innocent
2) which does not suggest contamination​

So what does Nencini do with samples #4 and #5? He assigns them to "amica", two unknown of Meredith's women friends who could have come into contact with the bra for innocent reasons. Not one but TWO women with Y-genetic material.

Nencini has brilliantly proven that four of the five samples on the clasp are there for innocent reasons, not suggestive of contamination. And the fifth has to be Raffaele's, there for sinister reasons even though Raffaele only belongs to a large group of men owning that Y-Haplotype.

Why might this not be part of the defence's appeal? Because for the defence to suggest that any of the officers of any of the courts had either been incompetent or criminal.....

...... instead of the higher court investigating that claim.....

...... the defence themselves get charged with defamation or calunnia.

That's how it works in Italy.

 

[carbonjam72]

Unknown unknowns...

CoulsdonUK.... maybe in preparation to reading the translations....

Do you believe that those extra two Y-haplotypes on the bra clasp could theoretically belong to women? I mean, forget about Nencini for a second..... is THAT possible?

Surely you don't need to read a translation to have an opinion about that!

Just for the record, doesn't the fact that there are extra profiles on the clasp raise the same question of contamination, whether those extra profiles are male or female?

Without specifically identifying who the extra DNA profiles belong to, how can one say the deposits are condemning, innocent transfer or contamination? Suppose they came from Stefanoni, or another female officer?

The logic being used here by Nencini, is that Meredith Kercher was "a good girl" and didn't have a lot of contact with men, such that they would put their hands on her bra clasp.

Nencini assigns 2 of the unknown profiles to Meredith's friends. But the unsupported assignment of one of the 3 unknown males to her boyfriend downstairs is equally indicative of contamination.

The three male profiles are unknown - Nencini may wish to assign them to whomever he pleases, but they are factually 'unknown', in so far as actual evidence is concerned.

But these are 3 unknown male profiles, and that is inconsistent with Nencini's 'white washing' of Meredith's character in this go-round, which given the farcical nature of this tragic case, is a sort of kindness to the Kerchers.

It's no excuse for convicting two innocent people of course, the Italian judges belong in jail with Mignini and his accomplices as far as I'm concerned, but it is slightly humanizing, imo.

 

[carbonjam72]

Duncini

Gosh; I have expressed an opinion, I would like to read the translated report, I think it is unwise to pick a paragraph or two then to make a judgement on the entire document; I fail to see how this is “guilt-like”. I wonder why the defence isn’t publishing their appeals this time round.

If you don't accept the error in Nencini's motivation report, that women have "Y" chromosomes, it's hard to believe you're discussing anything in good faith.

It's a glaring error, and it serves a functional purpose in denying contamination of the bra clasp. It's not honest. It's intentionally false, and used to justify an knowingly unjust conviction. Unless you believe Nencini is that ignorant.