Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Dan O.]

It appears that in all the hoopla of trying to tie Amanda to a drug dealer a pertinent issue has been overlooked. The written statement that started this asserted that it was the contact with Amanda which resulted in Lorenzo,s phone being tapped which led to the discovery of Lorenzo's dealings. From this we can quite easily deduce that anyone with similar contact with Amanda would also have drawn similar scrutiny from the Italian police. We can see on the phone records that Amanda had numerous contacts with Patrick including the SMS exchange that night prior to Meredith's murder. This is additional evidence that ILE was aware of Patrick and almost certainly had his phone and business bugged prior to Amanda's interrogations on the 5th.

 

[Desert Fox]

Chris Halkides rescued me, it was Federico Aldrovandi.

Here's a little from Maresca, pushing the idea the injuries had nothing to do with the death, it was the small amount of cocaine in his system:



Here's one which includes a picture, it's not the one I'm thinking of. I think the picture I was thinking of was the one of the guy who was thrown out the window and they claimed it was suicide, maybe his name started with Stephan?

In the United States, we have problems with police and abuse of power. Often it is hard to prosecute them. It is [i suspect] a worldwide problem. At least though generally we don't in the US defend them and excuse them.

 

[Desert Fox]

Now that people are challenging you on your claims, you suddenly run and hide behind the pedantic definitions of connections.

I have seen a lot from those who argue for guilt that they argue "Letter" vs "spirit" of the law. If you can stretch a law while staying within the letter even if it violates the spirit, they seem to be fine with it.

 

[Desert Fox]

When an expert like, just as an example, Dr Peter Gill goes about confirming or rejecting a hypothesis, he dispassionately looks at the data and follows that where it leads him. If the data rejects his hypothesis, he recalibrates and starts over.

If, on the other hand, a clown like Ergon of PMF fame clownishly sets out to refute someone like Gill, he begins with the conclusion that Knox and Sollecito are guilty, and then embarks upon whatever nonsense and sophistry are necessary to "refute" Gill, and "support" his a priori conclusion.

The difference is between the habits and methods of a trained thinker and scientist, and those of an amateur essayist operating on a 10th grade level.

This is pretty much the problem with the pro guilt side. No matter what evidence, they then just twist everything around in an attempt to fit it into a pro guilt argument.

There is literally no way to disprove the pro guilt side because they will fit anything into their narrative. I think if they had video files of Amanda and Raff having sex at the time of the murder, the argument would be that he developed a robot to kill Meredeth,

 

[Chris_Halkides]

how Dr. Gill would test a hypothesis

When an expert like, just as an example, Dr Peter Gill goes about confirming or rejecting a hypothesis, he dispassionately looks at the data and follows that where it leads him. If the data rejects his hypothesis, he recalibrates and starts over.

If, on the other hand, a clown like Ergon of PMF fame clownishly sets out to refute someone like Gill, he begins with the conclusion that Knox and Sollecito are guilty, and then embarks upon whatever nonsense and sophistry are necessary to "refute" Gill, and "support" his a priori conclusion.

The difference is between the habits and methods of a trained thinker and scientist, and those of an amateur essayist operating on a 10th grade level.

js202,

After having to endure years of poor science from the prosecution, it is a pleasure for me to read Dr. Gill's book and to see how he would have practiced the scientific method with respect to this case. He outlines a couple of experiments that should have been done: one to test the hypothesis that the location of DNA tells us whether the knife was used for food preparation or for stabbing someone, and another to test the hypothesis that one can clean a knife of blood but not DNA. He is sharply critical of the former hypothesis (saying that it has no support in the forensic literature) and sounds skeptical of the latter.

 

[anglolawyer]

There are two different kinds of lists.
One is a list of full traffic, including voice, SMS, etc. obtained from the service provider Vodafone. This is a full list (excluding unsuccessful or unanswered tries).

The other is a list of SMS messages obtained from Amanda's phone, both from the memory of the handset and from the SIM card. This is not a full list, deleted messages are not in it.
The original full list (as obtained from Vodafone) has no names at all, only two numbers (caller, callee). No texts of the SMS messages, either. In a few cases only Amanda's number is given.
Various derivative lists have been prepared by posters, these include names but not for all traffic.

As for the SMS list, which includes the texts themselves, too, in the original list there are no numbers, only names.

Your time stamp reveals that it comes from the SMS list. Because they are off by 3:13.
In the SMS list there is only one Lorenzo item around Nov 5 13:27. The one Amanda sent to Lorenzo. The preceding incoming text from Lorenzo had been deleted.
But in the full traffic list it is there, number, time, etc, but not the text, of course.

Where are you getting the highlighted information? The faxed list does not contain any description of what the list represents.

 

[Grinder]

js202,

After having to endure years of poor science from the prosecution, it is a pleasure for me to read Dr. Gill's book and to see how he would have practiced the scientific method with respect to this case. He outlines a couple of experiments that should have been done: one to test the hypothesis that the location of DNA tells us whether the knife was used for food preparation or for stabbing someone, and another to test the hypothesis that one can clean a knife of blood but not DNA. He is sharply critical of the former hypothesis (saying that it has no support in the forensic literature) and sounds skeptical of the latter.

The experiments are flawed. Would the food handling include the washing process and the act of putting it away be included? In both acts a person could leave DNA anywhere. The hypothesis is ridiculous.

The other test couldn't really replicate the alleged finding. If the finding was the predicted negative then it would be said that the grove wasn't the same or that the DNA didn't get caught in it. Would bleach be used? How much washing and with how much soap? Could one prove the negative? I don't think twenty tests would prove it. I'm sure the tests would show that in order to get all the blood off, the DNA would be removed as well.

Now the test that would be the more interesting would be to soak the blade and handle in blood on several identical knives, clean them and then see if there is any blood under the handle. If blood did show up, then demanding it be opened would be hard to deny. I don't think her appeal mentions the refusal of the opening nor do they mention the independent experts or RSI.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

As Treebeard might say, let's not be hasty

The experiments are flawed.

Grinder,

Are you going from the book itself or my summary? I did not describe the experiments he proposed in detail. I see your point about the groove, but the groove is a red herring. Something that found itself in a groove would not be immune to the actions of detergent or bleach. The larger point is that experiments should have been done, as oppposed to offering assertions, which is what the prosecution did. This is what he said about the prosecution's contention that the knife was used for stabbing, not ordinary kitchen work: “However, this is dangerous speculation that is another example of confirmation bias—there is nothing in the scientific literature that remotely supports such an inference.” (p. 150)

From the English translation of the Massei report, p. 376, "It must be also emphasised that the presence of biological traces discovered on the handle of this knife, – and on which, regarding its attribution to Amanda, there was advanced no particular censure nor perplexity, – appears more likely to have been derived from her having held the knife to strike, rather than from having used it to cut some food.

"Remembering that this trace was found at the point in which the knife handle has a kind of upturn or rise [rialzo], after which the blade begins, with the knife positioned thus in a horizontal position with respect to the plane on which one is cutting [piano di appoggio], it appears somewhat unlikely to hypothesise that such a biological trace would have come to rest at the point indicated. Conversely, should the cutting implement be used for striking, and therefore moving it not horizontally, but with a certain inclination, it is quite probable for the hand holding the knife to undergo a sliding motion due to the violence required for the blow and, finishing up with a certain violence against said upturn, thereby leaving behind the biological trace."

 

[Grinder]

Grinder,

Are you going from the book itself or my summary? I did not describe the experiments he proposed in detail. I see your point about the groove, but the groove is a red herring. Something that found itself in a groove would not be immune to the actions of detergent or bleach. The larger point is that experiments should have been done, as oppposed to offering assertions, which is what the prosecution did. This is what he said about the prosecution's contention that the knife was used for stabbing, not ordinary kitchen work: “However, this is dangerous speculation that is another example of confirmation bias—there is nothing in the scientific literature that remotely supports such an inference.” (p. 150)

From the English translation of the Massei report, p. 376, "It must be also emphasised that the presence of biological traces discovered on the handle of this knife, – and on which, regarding its attribution to Amanda, there was advanced no particular censure nor perplexity, – appears more likely to have been derived from her having held the knife to strike, rather than from having used it to cut some food.

"Remembering that this trace was found at the point in which the knife handle has a kind of upturn or rise [rialzo], after which the blade begins, with the knife positioned thus in a horizontal position with respect to the plane on which one is cutting [piano di appoggio], it appears somewhat unlikely to hypothesise that such a biological trace would have come to rest at the point indicated. Conversely, should the cutting implement be used for striking, and therefore moving it not horizontally, but with a certain inclination, it is quite probable for the hand holding the knife to undergo a sliding motion due to the violence required for the blow and, finishing up with a certain violence against said upturn, thereby leaving behind the biological trace."

from your summary

I agree it is a stupid concept but don't agree that there is a test that proves it. The groove may not exist but the PGP will look at a test and say it wasn't replicated, which is impossible if it didn't exist.

The prosecution should be made to replicate the DNA finding not the other way round.

 

[Grinder]

Where are you getting the highlighted information? The faxed list does not contain any description of what the list represents.

I do believe that it is listed as incoming on the phone and outgoing on the phone and a combination on the SIM.

 

[Desert Fox]

from your summary

I agree it is a stupid concept but don't agree that there is a test that proves it. The groove may not exist but the PGP will look at a test and say it wasn't replicated, which is impossible if it didn't exist.

The prosecution should be made to replicate the DNA finding not the other way round.

In an unbiased world, I agree with you. The problem is that the Italian legal system seems to be biased far in favor of the prosecution. As such, the defense has to prove things that they should not have to do.

 

[Grinder]

In an unbiased world, I agree with you. The problem is that the Italian legal system seems to be biased far in favor of the prosecution. As such, the defense has to prove things that they should not have to do.

First of all no matter what kind of world you MUST agree with me - OBEY

The point I was making is that the defense can't prove either point in a way that will satisfy the PGP.

Because of that I suggest the only way to go is to have the prosecution prove what they contend not only can happen but that it is the norm. Even that is fraught with problems.

If the prosecution were able to demonstrate that a knife can be cleaned of blood yet retain some DNA would that change any PIP's opinion? If the alleged actual test couldn't be replicated would that change the opinion of any PGP?

I just think it is a dead end.

 

[Samson]

First of all no matter what kind of world you MUST agree with me - OBEY

The point I was making is that the defense can't prove either point in a way that will satisfy the PGP.

Because of that I suggest the only way to go is to have the prosecution prove what they contend not only can happen but that it is the norm. Even that is fraught with problems.

If the prosecution were able to demonstrate that a knife can be cleaned of blood yet retain some DNA would that change any PIP's opinion? If the alleged actual test couldn't be replicated would that change the opinion of any PGP?

I just think it is a dead end.

I see no reason why a test would not be conclusive.
Amanda has been found guilty generally of murder and specifically driving that knife to a minimum depth. They also claim dna lodged in a groove.
This seems a very easy experiment with a hundred similarly grooved knives and a few animals.
If dna can be recovered a few times with no blood they prove something. They certainly don't prove Amanda killed Meredith of course
If on the other hand no bloodless dna can be recovered, there is proof it was not the murder weapon.

 

[Desert Fox]

First of all no matter what kind of world you MUST agree with me - OBEY

The point I was making is that the defense can't prove either point in a way that will satisfy the PGP.

Because of that I suggest the only way to go is to have the prosecution prove what they contend not only can happen but that it is the norm. Even that is fraught with problems.

If the prosecution were able to demonstrate that a knife can be cleaned of blood yet retain some DNA would that change any PIP's opinion? If the alleged actual test couldn't be replicated would that change the opinion of any PGP?

I just think it is a dead end.

You are likely right with this item of evidence with regards to the pro innocence side. I do however believe that the right evidence would convince me of their guilt. Now, I think at this stage, everything important is available and I don't see it likely that there is any new evidence that would change my mind.

I will argue that there is no evidence that would convince the pro guilt side of their innocence (or even no guilty.) I have just read a number of old article comments with a criminal case where the defendants were given a conditional governor pardon. A fair reading of that case also makes it almost certain that they are not guilty but many of the comments are positively venomous. I see this case as similar. The pro guilt side is not looking at the evidence but are operating with a visceral hatred.

 

[Samson]

You are likely right with this item of evidence with regards to the pro innocence side. I do however believe that the right evidence would convince me of their guilt. Now, I think at this stage, everything important is available and I don't see it likely that there is any new evidence that would change my mind.

I will argue that there is no evidence that would convince the pro guilt side of their innocence (or even no guilty.) I have just read a number of old article comments with a criminal case where the defendants were given a conditional governor pardon. A fair reading of that case also makes it almost certain that they are not guilty but many of the comments are positively venomous. I see this case as similar. The pro guilt side is not looking at the evidence but are operating with a visceral hatred.

I wonder if belatedly discovered video evidence of Rudy throwing the rock through the window at 8 30pm would be sufficient to change all minds.

 

[anglolawyer]

I do believe that it is listed as incoming on the phone and outgoing on the phone and a combination on the SIM.

I know but the document is untitled and unexplained. It does not claim to be complete. People are just assuming that. They are going on to assume that anything that is not on the phone but is on the carrier's record must have been deleted. I do not think there is enough to go on.

 

[Desert Fox]

I wonder if belatedly discovered video evidence of Rudy throwing the rock through the window at 8 30pm would be sufficient to change all minds.

If it was found on Meredeth's hard drive a video of Guede attacking and sexually assaulting her along, they would likely argue that the others are off camera directing the attack.

 

[Grinder]

I see no reason why a test would not be conclusive.
Amanda has been found guilty generally of murder and specifically driving that knife to a minimum depth. They also claim dna lodged in a groove.
This seems a very easy experiment with a hundred similarly grooved knives and a few animals.
If dna can be recovered a few times with no blood they prove something. They certainly don't prove Amanda killed Meredith of course
If on the other hand no bloodless dna can be recovered, there is proof it was not the murder weapon.

Well we will disagree. To prove that it couldn't happen is basically impossible. We all know that it is unlikely but Stef et al. allege that some DNA lodged in a striation that is very difficult to even see (PM Bill W for details) and this could be a one in thousand occurrence. We have no idea how the knife was cleaned. How would it be cleaned for this test? How often would it be cleaned? Would it just be soaked or would it be scrubbed?

If DNA is recovered without blood it only removes that argument sort of. The defense would argue that the kids would have used the bleach so the test would have be done with bleach and a soaking with that for 1/2 an hour would alter the DNA.

This approach feels like a lawyer asking a question he doesn't know the answer to.

 

[Samson]

Well we will disagree. To prove that it couldn't happen is basically impossible. We all know that it is unlikely but Stef et al. allege that some DNA lodged in a striation that is very difficult to even see (PM Bill W for details) and this could be a one in thousand occurrence. We have no idea how the knife was cleaned. How would it be cleaned for this test? How often would it be cleaned? Would it just be soaked or would it be scrubbed?

If DNA is recovered without blood it only removes that argument sort of. The defense would argue that the kids would have used the bleach so the test would have be done with bleach and a soaking with that for 1/2 an hour would alter the DNA.

This approach feels like a lawyer asking a question he doesn't know the answer to.

I agree proof is a stretch, but proof beyond reasonable doubt...
I have been thinking that the experiment can be exaggerated by creating deep striations in multiple locations on a few knifes. Just one animal now required, and a few different cleaning regimes. If bloodless dna can not be found now, how was it found just once in a barely visible striation?
On a general note there are plenty of experiments unattempted, I would still like to see volunteers replicate Meredith in a variety of best guesses on the alcohol, the meal, and have the GE scans.

 

[Grinder]

I know but the document is untitled and unexplained. It does not claim to be complete. People are just assuming that. They are going on to assume that anything that is not on the phone but is on the carrier's record must have been deleted. I do not think there is enough to go on.

Yes all true. Did you notice the document fax cover was dated 1/26/08 but the fax date stamp was 1/24/08.

I'm beginning to see how Mussolini made the trains run on time; he just altered the clocks or if need be the date