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

[Bill Williams]

And your point is?

Stilicho doesn't have a point.

He spends his time on PMF where contrary opinion is not allowed, so they've convinced themselves that the slightest variation of memory by Amanda and/or Raffaele on the most minor of evening happenstances makes them liars and murderers!

Proof is that what doubles as Stilicho's theory of the crime.....

Amanda had just met Raffaele before roping him and another local into helping her exact her murderous vengeance on Meredith for various perceived injustices.

..... is not supported or sustained by any of even the convicting judges.

It's why I bring up the PMF sites, because it is in those echo chambers that this sort of lunacy is countenanced, and any departure from the lunacy results in bannings....

When Stilicho says he's regarded as an expert in "the lies Amanda told," he's only viewed as one on those sites. So consider the source...

 

[Skind]

Amanda doesn't once talk or write about having watched Naruto, Sailor Moon, or any other kind of cartoon that night: not in her court testimony; not in her book; not in any of her handful of tearful televised appearances; not in any voluntary statements; not in her alibi email spammed to her contacts list; not at all.

Well, on what day was she specifically and directly asked about it?

 

[Desert Fox]

I think i have some insight into how to consider this. . . .The system always works to protect itself.

I was recently reading Wiki on the USS Iowa turret explosion and while far from a direct case, still shows the lengths that that a system will go into protecting itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion

 

[kwill]

various perceived injustices

This sounds like something that could be debated on the evidence.

Someone has made a claim that
1. there were multiple injustices perceived by AK
2. Meredith was perceived by AK as the one responsible for them
3. AK killed her over them.

Okay.
1. What were the injustices as AK perceived them?
2. What is the evidence that she blamed Meredith for them?

I'm looking for testimony that says AK knew Meredith had been gossiping about her to her English friends, or that AK was jealous of Meredith.

Testimony from the English friends doesn't support the argument, because they're not able to represent what AK did or did not perceive. We need something from AK herself, or from someone AK confided in, that she perceived injustices.

Anybody?

 

[moije2]

So, the very first argument that Sollecito makes in his appeal is that it was error for Nencini to use "circumstantial evidence" to establish the "reliability" of otherwise unreliable scientific tests. In other words, scientific tests have to stand or fall on their own merit. I like it: they are daring the Italian Supreme Court to decide that science can be authenticated by speculation, and simultaneously suggesting that such a rule is illegal under the ECHR.

I especially liked the highlited sections below. In other words, to use Stefanoni's results is to use something other than science. Or, junk. And then as such it is not "fit", or worthy of consideration along with other circumstantial evidence. I would like to think that the ISC will actually respond to these points, although I won't hold my breath.

PS: Where did you find this? Sorry if I missed it, but I have not yet seen the actual language of the appeal documents.

Quote:
1) Scientific Evidence
The first question that requires a ruling of the United Sections regards the probative value of scientific evidence or circumstantial evidence, when it is in the presence of an investigation involving a high level of technical difficulty, but it was performed disregarding the recommendations of international human repertazione and interpretation data.
In this respect, it is necessary to assess whether this controversial figure, taken in violation of methods strongly recommended by the international scientific community (eg. Those issued by the International Society or no probative relief.
The profile in question assumes a crucial importance in the present case, since the contested judgment considered fully reliable and, therefore, conclusive conclusions reached by Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni (Scient Pol.) In order to trace DNA on the clasp Bra (rep. 165 B p. 240-250 and 320 sent. analysis results on the track 36B (blade of the kitchen knife), the Court held that the reference value they could take seriously circumstantial evidence (p. 321 sent. ).
In this regard, it should be pointed out that the expert report ordered on appeal, signed by Profs. Rather old and accounts, concerning the reliability of the results conducted by Dr. Stefanoni on these two findings (36 and 165 B), had led to a substantial unreliability of such assessments due to non-compliance with the procedures of inspection and repertazione, as well as for failure of international recommendations concerning the interpretation of the data.
However, the requirement of controllability marks the boundary between scientific and non-scientific theories; on the other hand, it is known that a scientific law can be considered as such only after being subjected to repeated attempts to overcome counterfeiting and after receiving repeated confirmations.
Other unfailing requirement is that of the widespread acceptance of the method within the international scientific community, because the failure to validate a specific technique means scientific uncertainty, which can not only achieve the acquittal of the accused when the evidence of guilt depends on it, given the uncertainty of the result.
For the above reasons, it is clear based on what parameters it may be considered that an investigation has technical validity of evidence or clue, or, conversely, when it is considered to be unreliable, that is unfit to compete, along with other elements, to base an assessment of responsibility.
The Court has held that "in assessing the results of an expert or technical advice, the judge must verify the scientific validity of the criteria and methods of investigation used, when they present themselves as new and experimental and therefore not subject to the scrutiny of a number of cases and the critical comparison between the experts of the industry, so they can not be considered yet acquired the assets of the scientific community "(Court of Cassation, Sec. II, July 11, 2012, Rv. 254344; Cass., Sec. II 17 October 2003, n. 834, Rv. 227854).​

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The sad case of Federico Aldrovandi

Acc. to even their admission, it did happen in the station. What they are denying is that it was a homicide.

What is compelling, though, is that this is the arena into which the Kercher murder was adjudicated. What the police say is law - it's called impunity.

It's why to this day the lawyers for Knox and Sollecito cannot point out the obvious - corruption within the Perugian PLE. If they do, then it is calunnia or defamation. By definition.

Bill Williams,

I think that the article you linked said that he was in custody. I have seen photographs of his body (they are not for the faint of heart), and I think it happened in a street:

"The prosecutor, Nicola Proto who had asked for 3 years and 8 months, said that Federico was ferociously killed while his pleas for help went unanswered, as stated by two witnesses who happened to be in the area of Ferrara’s race track, where the event took place. An imprudent scuffle that degenerated into beatings about the head as well as on the arms, legs and back, being dragged along the asphalt and the squashing of his body by one of the military that led to the death of the young man from hypoxia as well.
Like Riccardo Rasman, Federico Aldrovandi was handcuffed and placed facedown before he died. The results of the medical forensics showed bruises and haematomas all over his body, including a cut to the head around the in occiput, squashed testicles, a deep wound to one buttock and scratches on the face.
According to the hypothesis of a cardio pathologist from the University of Padua, professor Thiene, it is thought that Federico’s heart stopped after he received a violent blow.
Furthermore, the recording of the telephone conversation with Headquarters in the minutes immediately following Federico’s arrest, leaves little doubt: “we really beat him up. Now he has fainted. I don’t know. He’s half dead.”
So basically, according to the prosecutor, the homicide took place in a condition of disproportionality between any level of psycho-motor agitation on behalf of the young man who was alone, disarmed and handcuffed, in relation to the condition of the police officers who were in a team of four, all sober and even armed.
The violence of the blows was such that in fact two of the truncheons broke."

I agree 110% with what I take to be your larger point, which is that anyone who learns about this case (not just the beating but also the fact that Federico's mother was sued about ten times) has to ask himself or herself whether Italy has a problem with an imbalance of power and a lack of police accountability, as is also suggested by Amnesty International's 2007 report, to which I have linked many times. The fact that Maresca represented the police in another case is something I find very interesting. One wonders if he is a natural born authoritarian.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Separation of the wheat from the chaff

Just like they did appealing the Massei verdict. Yawn. Two separate defendants with two teams of lawyers both wanting to be paid.

IIUC Bongiorno argued before the CSC in 2008 that evidence that placed Knox at the Cottage (presumably her "voluntary" statements) did not place Sollecito there. The PG commenters managed to misunderstand that also (Katy_did was instrumental in separating the wheat from the chaff in these threads IIRC). Those who hope for a separation are saying much more about themselves than they are about the case. MOO.

 

[Dan O.]

For those more familiar with the phone evidence than I can someone explain why Nencini concludes



Now cell 25622 is Piazza Lupattelli, which Knox subsequently connects to when she outside of the apartment giving directions to the Carabinieri. Nencini concludes the phone has definitely left the apartment by this time. The 22.13 call was via cell 30064 Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte la Guardia, is there any reason to think that the phone was more likely to be in the apartment if connecting to cell 30064 than 25622?

Cells 25622 and 30064 are part of the WIND network which was used by Meredith's English phone. Amanda's phone used the Vodafone network. Both Vodafone and WIND shared the structure at Piazza Lupattelli which was quite close to the cottage. but there was no possibility for Amanda's phone to connect to the cell at Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte la Guardia.

Cells are typically divided into 3 sectors with separate antennas on the same tower. Cell 25622 is for a sector that faces away from the cottage and towards Lana's garden where Meredith's phones were found.

 

[Kaosium]

The fact that Maresca represented the police in another case is something I find very interesting. One wonders if he is a natural born authoritarian.

Something I recall from early in my reading of this case is that Maresca's father was a policeman whose father worked on the Monster of Florence case (the real one--not Mignini's redux) like so many other Italian police did. As I recall, Bad English at IIP mentioned it in his first postings there some four or so years ago, in part to explain there were so many police working on that case it was not unusual in Italy and that Mignini's resurrection of the case wasn't related.

I assume you've seen this? For those who didn't come across his name numerous times in learning about forensic DNA here's a little something about Dr. Peter Gill.

Hrm. More than 180 scientific papers published with nearly 13k citations.

Would that be considered A Lot?

 

[Kaosium]

IIUC Bongiorno argued before the CSC in 2008 that evidence that placed Knox at the Cottage (presumably her "voluntary" statements) did not place Sollecito there. The PG commenters managed to misunderstand that also (Katy_did was instrumental in separating the wheat from the chaff in these threads IIRC). Those who hope for a separation are saying much more about themselves than they are about the case. MOO.

Some of them need that separation themselves I think, divorcing themselves from the case. I recall circa 2008 I was talking to a Psych professor at the UW and he mentioned a project they were considering regarding how online behavior can affect people, how crude conditioning can take place due to constant positive/negative feedback especially for those online all day, every day. About a year ago I came across a paper that reminded me of that project, at least it was from the UW and regarded how reading strident positions online tends to polarize observers views. It was cited by one publication (Popular Science) when they closed their comments sections as they thought this research suggested they were destructive.

 

[acbytesla]

Cells 25622 and 30064 are part of the WIND network which was used by Meredith's English phone. Amanda's phone used the Vodafone network. Both Vodafone and WIND shared the structure at Piazza Lupattelli which was quite close to the cottage. but there was no possibility for Amanda's phone to connect to the cell at Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte la Guardia.

Cells are typically divided into 3 sectors with separate antennas on the same tower. Cell 25622 is for a sector that faces away from the cottage and towards Lana's garden where Meredith's phones were found.

I'm a little confused Dan. I thought Planigale was asking if the phone could have been at the apartment..meaning Raffaele's But his quote of Nencini seems nonsensical to me.

My first question to you, is can you tell which sector by the numbers 25622 and 30064 alone? I was under the impression that this was the number of the tower itself and did not designate the sectors. Is the final digit for example a designation for the sector?

It seems to me that Nencini is trying to discount Pellero's testimony by saying..."look, Meredith's phone tried to connect through 25622 (Piazza Lupatelli) instead of the 30064 that Pellero said was a 99 percent probability in the Parco San Angelo so Dr. Pellero was wrong. (Of course, Pellero was talking about across the street in the public park as opposed to Lana's fenced off private yard that the killer was very unlikely not in.)

 

[Desert Fox]

Or maybe a video of their, ah hurrumph, "activities" that night. I'm sure that tape would have not been lost and would have undergone extensive scrutiny to ensure that it was genuine.

Not the first time that evidence of innocence gets lost. . . .Not just discussing Italy here.

And Desert Fox mentioned that there's no evidence of AK being in MK's room during the murder. That's absolutely correct. Some point to the knife as that link. Well there is no evidence that the knife was ever in her bedroom. None! I mean, if it had been found down in the canyon covered in Meredith's blood and DNA, then yes, I'd be right there on the guilt side myself. It would be obvious.

But there's no blood on the knife, and no evidence that there ever was any. The DNA "find" is not repeatable, it was only found by one person, and that person is withholding the raw data from the run. In other words, "trust me, I found it". Not good enough...

Even assuming the DNA was real, and it does not appear to have been, there are several logical explanations involving secondary transfer.

 

[Planigale]

Cells 25622 and 30064 are part of the WIND network which was used by Meredith's English phone. Amanda's phone used the Vodafone network. Both Vodafone and WIND shared the structure at Piazza Lupattelli which was quite close to the cottage. but there was no possibility for Amanda's phone to connect to the cell at Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte la Guardia.

Cells are typically divided into 3 sectors with separate antennas on the same tower. Cell 25622 is for a sector that faces away from the cottage and towards Lana's garden where Meredith's phones were found.

Thank you. Very helpful. So we are back to the 22.13 call very likely to be out of the apartment at the time (and hence post murder). However theoretically if nearer cells were busy MK English phone might connect via 30064 from the apartment although it had never previously done so. This should be something knowable. The police seem to have requested records of phones in the vicinity, so we should know if there was activity involving the closer cells at 22.13 (not a time I would expect much activity), and therefore if the nearer cells were busy.

This is a little like the assumption by Nencini that MK's boyfriend's DNA was on the bra hook. This is knowable, one should not be making an assumption.

The problem with the inquisitorial system here is the ability of the judge to make a case out of gaps between evidence. If the prosecution claimed that the DNA was from the boyfriend the defence would ask for the evidence, if the prosecution claimed the cell network was busy at 22.13 the defence would ask for the evidence, if the prosecution claimed the knife was carried in a bag then the defence could present evidence to refute this. if the judge invents these facts the defence is denied a right to reply, and it appears the judge can invent facts with no evidence.

 

[Desert Fox]

The problem with the inquisitorial system here is the ability of the judge to make a case out of gaps between evidence. If the prosecution claimed that the DNA was from the boyfriend the defence would ask for the evidence, if the prosecution claimed the cell network was busy at 22.13 the defence would ask for the evidence, if the prosecution claimed the knife was carried in a bag then the defence could present evidence to refute this. if the judge invents these facts the defence is denied a right to reply, and it appears the judge can invent facts with no evidence.

I would be curious how the Inquisitorial works in other countries such as the Netherlands, for example.

 

[acbytesla]

Thank you. Very helpful. So we are back to the 22.13 call very likely to be out of the apartment at the time (and hence post murder). However theoretically if nearer cells were busy MK English phone might connect via 30064 from the apartment although it had never previously done so. This should be something knowable. The police seem to have requested records of phones in the vicinity, so we should know if there was activity involving the closer cells at 22.13 (not a time I would expect much activity), and therefore if the nearer cells were busy.

You absolutely nailed it Planigale. There has always been a much stronger possibility that Meredith's phone was not at the cottage than it being in the cottage. I have been saying this for more than two years although I didn't have the necessary info to confirm it. I thought so by examining the geography of the area and it is obvious that Parco San Angelo although very close to the Piazza Lupatelli cell antenna would have a difficult time ever connecting to that cell because of line of sight.

Thanks to Dan O and others, they have translated Dr. Pellero's (the defense's cellular engineer) testimony who says that 99 out of 100 times Meredith's phone would likely connect via 30064 at the Parco San Angelo very close to where the phones ended up and 1, 2 maybe 3 times out of 100 it would connect via 30064 if it was at the cottage. Lots of cellular traffic would be the only reason that might change that.

But that would almost never be an issue at 10:13 PM on a Thursday night. And the judicial police examined the quantity of traffic that night and it was not an issue.

Dr. Pellero : I’ll refer to the summarized result and then I can explain it. On the basis of the summarized result the telephone would have been in the area for which it has was established that there wasn’t any unusual traffic, the Judicial Police did tests regarding the quantity of traffic and that is not a concern,

Pellero: : 99 times out of a 100 the cell repeater 30064 would have been chosen as the repeater serving the points measured in Sant’Angelo Park, there exists a residual possibility in Meredith’s house that could be one, two or three per cent.
Bongiorno: It’s not possible to objectively say that the cell repeater 30064 is incompatible with via della Pergola, on the basis of these calculations which take into account the C2 factor, one can say that it is more likely that it was in Sant’Angelo Park, as a probability it’s about 99%?
Pellero: Look the probability can be measured in these terms and what I can tell you is that at Sant’Angelo Park, the difference with the next nearest cell repeater is considerable, really considerable, so it would have used this repeater and wouldn’t have searched for another. This also because obviously I have taken into account the results of the measurements that were obtained by the Procura and this certainly permits me to exclude that the repeater 30064 was incompatible with via Sperandio, which emerged from the other side.
Bongiorno: Are there any other clarifications that you’d like to make now?
Pellero: No.

 

[anglolawyer]

Thank you. Very helpful. So we are back to the 22.13 call very likely to be out of the apartment at the time (and hence post murder). However theoretically if nearer cells were busy MK English phone might connect via 30064 from the apartment although it had never previously done so. This should be something knowable. The police seem to have requested records of phones in the vicinity, so we should know if there was activity involving the closer cells at 22.13 (not a time I would expect much activity), and therefore if the nearer cells were busy.

snip

My memory may be awry but didn't Comodi put it to Pellero (defence expert) that the records showed her phone connected with 30064 several times before and that, because it was unlikely she had ever been in the vicinity of Lana's garden, having no reason to go there, in all probability her phone did connect to 30064 even when at the apartment? We have to know where her phone was at the time of each connection to be sure. The translation was posted here recently.

It's the one where she says the postal police cannot have interfered with the phone because she, Comodi, says so (her meaning possibly being that she was asking the expert to assume hypothetically that there had been no deletions, rather than that she was reserving the right to stipulate key facts).

 

[Dan O.]

I'm a little confused Dan. I thought Planigale was asking if the phone could have been at the apartment..meaning Raffaele's But his quote of Nencini seems nonsensical to me.

Unless the cells were installed with the usual Italian standard of excellence, the phone could not have been at the cottage for the last connection at 10 minutes past midnight on Nov 2.

My first question to you, is can you tell which sector by the numbers 25622 and 30064 alone? I was under the impression that this was the number of the tower itself and did not designate the sectors. Is the final digit for example a designation for the sector?

It is quite likely that the cells are numbered as you said with the final digit designating the sector. But it is only a common convention that the first cell is the one pointing north. Sometimes there isn't a cell pointing North so the numbering will vary. A common setup has 9 sectors with sectors 0, 3 and 6 all pointing North but on different frequencies. We see these multiple sectors in the Vodafone cells but there isn't enough data from the WIND cell network to tell.

It seems to me that Nencini is trying to discount Pellero's testimony by saying..."look, Meredith's phone tried to connect through 25622 (Piazza Lupatelli) instead of the 30064 that Pellero said was a 99 percent probability in the Parco San Angelo so Dr. Pellero was wrong. (Of course, Pellero was talking about across the street in the public park as opposed to Lana's fenced off private yard that the killer was very unlikely not in.)

It would be interesting to see Pellero's raw data. I would think that only when you were in the shadow of the city wall in Parco San Angelo would the nearby cell in Piazza Lupatelli be blocked thus allowing the connection to be made through the distant 30064 cell.

Then, SMS and MMS connections like the one that came in at 22:13 throw in another curve. Since the phone doesn't renegotiate the connection for these messages, it is only necessary for the phone to have passed near the city wall in the park to force a handoff to cell 30064. The phone will hold that connection for several minutes as long as it sees the signal. The phone could be anywhere between the city wall and Lana's garden when the 22:13 MMS connection came in. A voice call like the one at 00:10 however will force the phone to pick the best cell to take the call on which in this case was 25622 and compatible with the phone being in the garden.


I've looked for similar structures that could have caused a handoff to 30064 while Meredith was in the cottage. What I find however is that the entrance to the cottage itself will block reception from 30064 and force the phone to make it's connection to Piazza Lupatelli which is a direct line of sight. While it may be possible (like 1-3%) to find locations in the back of the cottage where 30064 is stronger than Piazza Lupatelli, I doubt that the signal from Piazza Lupatelli would ever drop below the minimum threshold to force the handoff.

 

[Dan O.]

My memory may be awry but didn't Comodi put it to Pellero (defence expert) that the records showed her phone connected with 30064 several times before and that, because it was unlikely she had ever been in the vicinity of Lana's garden, having no reason to go there, in all probability her phone did connect to 30064 even when at the apartment? We have to know where her phone was at the time of each connection to be sure. The translation was posted here recently.

Yes. There were several instances where a portion of a call was handled by cell 30064. But I think they only found one other instance where the entire call was handled by that cell. The details of that call weren't given so we don't even know if it was an SMS or voice.

ETA: The one call was October 1 @4PM. Since the peak traffic period is between 4 and 6PM on weekdays, this call could have been diverted to the distant cell because the local cell was overloaded.

 

[Diocletus]

Yes. There were several instances where a portion of a call was handled by cell 30064. But I think they only found one other instance where the entire call was handled by that cell. The details of that call weren't given so we don't even know if it was an SMS or voice.

ETA: The one call was October 1 @4PM. Since the peak traffic period is between 4 and 6PM on weekdays, this call could have been diverted to the distant cell because the local cell was overloaded.

You guys and your telephone cell tower stuff.

Why would Meredith call her bank at 10 PM? She wouldn't. Therefore, someone else was making the call and she was dead.

 

[Diocletus]

I would be curious how the Inquisitorial works in other countries such as the Netherlands, for example.

Better.