Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Dan O.]

I put it through google translate...

You have to realize that Google isn't going to handle the cultural nuances. When Italians talk about drop-ins in a DNA context it's more along the lines of... we'll drop in a little Raffaele here and drop in a little Meredith there...

 

[Kaosium]

Here Stefanoni says they have conducted a series of tests to see if it was blood.

No, that's not how it comes across with google translate. What she said can easily be interpreted as saying they don't do those tests as (previous) tests her lab has conducted suggest there's too much 'risk.' She doesn't say they did TMB tests and they were negative, or anything akin, instead she goes off on a tangent regarding how it's 'too risky.' She's lying about that as well, incidentally, which is why the Polizia Scientifica did them in the first place and why forensic textbooks recommend that luminol hits be followed up by TMB or another color-change test as has been posted to this thread numerous times.

At any rate all a 'a series of tests in our laboratory' suggests is that Rose Montague was right and Stefanoni did do confirmatory tests on the luminol hits as well, but successfully hid those records. Those TMB tests are performed on site, it's a little strip or a little bottle they mix up like a pregnancy test, they certainly don't require a lab.

A series, not just one type, and you can see that this is directly linked with TMB because she picks it up again at p. 112, when he talks about TMB.
It is at that point that she points out that she has mentioned the topic when she was talking about the luminol prints. When she talks about TMB test p. 112 she linkes it immediately to the topic of the luminol prints, explaining the problem with performing TMB on the knife is exactly the same of what she already explained with luminol traces. The "warning" and digression about "false negatives" she makes about blood tests p. 59 and at p. 112 is clearly about the same topic.

Please post pages 111-113 in their entirety so I and others can make our own assessment of what she said. Using a spoiler box will enable it to be hidden inside the post so it doesn't distort your post aesthetically (I'm assuming you can just copy and paste it).

You say that TMB was done on the spot. But in fact it appears it's you who says that; it's far from being certain. Certainly she never lied TMB on the floor, because TMB is anyway an indirect test (at best is done with hemastix swabs, indicrect, not on the stains but on the swab instead).

You take a sample from the floor and apply it to the Hemastix strip or put it in the bottle with the reagents, it takes seconds or at most minutes.

Yet, instead, what you seem to have is your paraphrasing a hearsay from Sarah Gino.

From the convicting judge in the first trial.

What Stefanoni said on Oct. 4. 2008, to a lisetner whithout previous knowledge of details of the case (such as a judge) it rings like the opposite of what you claim Stefanoni said: you say she lied because she claimed she only did TMB tests on luminol stains; what she says to the judge on the very first hearing is that they did "a series of other tests".
These are the facts.

But there is also another gem, if you want to browse the document further: we also know from her testimony that Prof. Potenza was there all the time during the performing of luminol tests. While insted the other experts had left earlier, because it was dark and getting late. Potenza was there to the end and he could see all tests that were performed. Thus the claim that she "kept hidden" from the defence what she was doing is something even more ludicrous.

What she did that I regard as hiding is fail to include them in her comprehensive forensic report, the RTIGF. I am non-plussed to hear that the prosecution continued doing tests after the other experts left and unimpressed with the evidence that because Potenza was still around when the tests were conducted that meant it was OK not to record the results of those tests in the report.

But then, back to the point. The claim that Stefanoni said that she did not perform other tests other than TMB is disproven by a quote in which Stefanoni says the opposite. However, you still claim there is another paragraph - somewhere - where she states that she didn't perform TMB tests.
So you say it's "you know where", somewhere else.
Where is that? Where is "the other time" ? What do you have?

You posted it, not me. Shortly thereafter you took a long sabbatical. Given enough time and the proper....motivation....I'll find one of your previous references to it...

I bet there is nothing. I just bet you will step into one of the pro-Knox "translation" hoaxes such as the "control room" hoax et similia.

I can tell you in advance: there is no "TMB lie". You will never find it. Such claim is a hoax, doesn't exist in any trial paper.

One thing you'll never be able to spin your way out of: they did the TMB tests on the luminol hits, they were negative and they omitted them from their report. They then tried to claim, in defiance of the forensic literature on the subject, that doing those tests was 'too risky' because they might get false positives. They hid the results unfavorable to them and lied no matter how you try to spin it.

 

[Dan O.]

When the police "frame" some one in Italy, they try to cover as many of the bases as possible.

Did any of these allegations get into the trial? I suspect not, because of all the downstairs evidence that needed to be suppressed. It was probably safer for the frame to blame all the blood on the cat, limiting the false allegations of staging by Amanda to the upstairs.

So whatever became of this cat that you don't believe was injured at all?

 

[Kaosium]

You have to realize that Google isn't going to handle the cultural nuances. When Italians talk about drop-ins in a DNA context it's more along the lines of... we'll drop in a little Raffaele here and drop in a little Meredith there...

LOL!

 

[Dan O.]

Those TMB tests are performed on site, it's a little strip or a little bottle they mix up like a pregnancy test, they certainly don't require a lab.

The whole point of following Luminol with TMB is so you don't have to take negative samples back to the lab. TMB lets you exclude many of the common causes of false positive Luminol hits before you waste resources collecting the sample. If you are planning to run the sample through the laboratory tests anyhow, the TMB doesn't provide any useful information.

Apparently though the standard in Italy is to say that positive TMB results confirm the presence of blood and negative TMB results are ignored because the positive Luminol hit already confirmed that it was blood.

 

[Numbers]

So whatever became of this cat that you don't believe was injured at all?

By now, it's probably in cat heaven. And apparently there were two cats. One more uninjured than the other.

Was there a kitty litter box or were these cats just occasional visitors?

 

[Kaosium]

The whole point of following Luminol with TMB is so you don't have to take negative samples back to the lab. TMB lets you exclude many of the common causes of false positive Luminol hits before you waste resources collecting the sample. If you are planning to run the sample through the laboratory tests anyhow, the TMB doesn't provide any useful information.

Exactly.

Apparently though the standard in Italy is to say that positive TMB results confirm the presence of blood and negative TMB results are ignored because the positive Luminol hit already confirmed that it was blood.

And the lack of Meredith's DNA in most of them is just indicative of the TWOOF of luminol uber alles!

Luminol hits that test negative for blood with TMB and most of which don't contain the DNA of the person whose blood it's supposed to be. That's 'teaching the rest of the world how to do forensics' I guess.

 

[Dan O.]

By now, it's probably in cat heaven. And apparently there were two cats. One more uninjured than the other.

The bathroom window was left open for them to come and go. At least one of the cats was a stray that they allowed to adopt them.

Was there a kitty litter box or were these cats just occasional visitors?

There was some open dirt in that narrow room with the lights.

 

[anglolawyer]

Those keys for a staging
Republic - November 14, 2007 Page 17 Section: CHRONICLE [1] (Google translation)

PERUGIA - Two keys connected with a ring. For the investigators have a 'further proof of the guilt of Amanda Knox, accused with Raffaele Sollecito and Patrick Lumumba' s murder of Meredith Kercher. Are key 'apartment below the one where the young Englishman was killed in the evening between the' one and two November. On that ground, with three other boys, lives Giacomo Silenzi, Meredith's boyfriend, on 3 November he had told police: "Before leaving for Porto San Giorgio I gave the keys to my house asking Meredith to disinfect one of my two cats that had injured her ear. " On 6 November, the two keys were found in the chamber of Amanda Knox. Not a clue just because the room of Stephen, one of the three tenants of silence were discovered traces of blood. The four students have vowed to clean the stains left by the injured cat el 'entire house before leaving for vacation of the Bridge of the Dead. I do not know how to explain the traces of blood on the duvet of Stephen - said James Silenzi - just remember that the blood there 'was, and that Stephen had locked the room. " Those traces of blood could be part of the screening, according to investigators, enacted by Amanda and his accomplices to dribble suspects. Even these mysterious bloodstains are finished to the laboratory of the forensic team in Rome, where began the analysis of findings.
...​

But I thought the conspiracy was supposed to be that we weren't supposed to know about suspicious blood in locked rooms etc but here it is in the newspaper.

You have to realize that Google isn't going to handle the cultural nuances. When Italians talk about drop-ins in a DNA context it's more along the lines of... we'll drop in a little Raffaele here and drop in a little Meredith there...

Exactly.



And the lack of Meredith's DNA in most of them is just indicative of the TWOOF of luminol uber alles!

Luminol hits that test negative for blood with TMB and most of which don't contain the DNA of the person whose blood it's supposed to be. That's 'teaching the rest of the world how to do forensics' I guess.

Bleedin' eck. Are we doing luminol again?

I liked Mach's speech directed at Kevin Lowe about how the rules are everything because they provide context. I never knew that. There are rules and other rules, though, like the ones about not interrogating strongly suspected people through the night without a lawyer. By one set of rules, that is not allowed but a second set trumps the first set and provides that nobody is a suspect until the PM waves his magic wand ...

 

[Numbers]

But I thought the conspiracy was supposed to be that we weren't supposed to know about suspicious blood in locked rooms etc but here it is in the newspaper.






Bleedin' eck. Are we doing luminol again?

I liked Mach's speech directed at Kevin Lowe about how the rules are everything because they provide context. I never knew that. There are rules and other rules, though, like the ones about not interrogating strongly suspected people through the night without a lawyer. By one set of rules, that is not allowed but a second set trumps the first set and provides that nobody is a suspect until the PM waves his magic wand ...

This is part of the quasi-Newtonian aspect of Italian law that makes it so unique. For every law or rule there is an equal and opposite one, except that the law or rule favoring the prosecution and against the defense is always at least a bit stronger.

 

[RWVBWL]

Underwear or a Pillowcase

Greetings,
While at the beach today, where I've been from pre-dawn sunrise to sunset,
I sometimes pondered Crime Scene Marker #4. Missed some good discussion, woulda like to ask some questions and shared a few thoughts, oh well late as always, haha...

CSM #4 looked like some blue boxer briefs I used to wear, with grey colored elastic on the legs. Briefs can come in 2 lengths, well at least the ones I've bought before did, my blue/grey briefs were the shorter ones.

Watching the video and comparing the photo again, there is somewhat of a make-shift curtain, or cloths drying line on either side of the little tv in front of the chair.

There is some type of clothing or curtain hanging down, right above what ever it is that CSM #4 is. Makes me wonder if these are indeed underwear. When I saw this on video, that's what I thought they were, underwear, with blood on them, makes sense in a crime where a dude mighta ejaculated and left seminal fluid, presumed seminal fluid, as Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni mentioned when heard on video while talking with her assistant.

Hmmmm.
A guy who ejaculated would have probably had to pull down his underwear at some point, right? And with all the blood upstairs, I'd think that he might have gotten some blood on his underwear, especially if he was masturbating.

Is that underwear?
From what I gather, ILE says that CSM #4 is a pillow case.

I'd really, really like to see a full size photo or hi rez video clip
of these clothing or bedding items found on the BD living room floor.

It'd be interesting if that is underwear,
and this was what Dr. Stefanoni was talking about
when she wanted blood and seminal fluid tested, giving it priority.
Not the pillow case upstairs but from CSM #4 downstairs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlXKyMh48KQ&app=desktop


Whether underwear or a pillow case,
Crime Scene Marker #4, has IMHO, the most blood on it when compared to the other Crime Scene Markers. ILE says it's all from a cat? And the cat also left 2 bloody, curvy outlines on Giacomo's bedroom floor? Sure...

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

The rule of the game have to do with everything, because the rules of the game are the context, it's what determines whehter the players are honest or not. The honest players are those who play along with the game rules, first. Your red alarm and suspicion sets on when you see someone who glaringly violates the rules. Otherwise you would see just good players, average players, weak players.

You seem to have wandered off. Come back to us! If what we care about is the truth what matters it whether the defence were good players or weak players for not asking for full discovery of all the electronic data files early?

It is a meaningless discussion. All that matters is the truth of what is in those files.

It is not that makes people "look" more or less corrupt, it is actually a matter of making sense of human actions. That is, narratives. If you presume a disingenuous intent, you will interpret every action under a different meaning. The whole way of interpreting events may change. Whether you believe one source, or instead another one, your idea about facts of history may change completely.

Fascinating.

We do neither of those things. We observe, then judge. We presume nothing. We conclude that Stefanoni was both incompetent and dishonest.

But it's not just about that. There is more. The rules of the game are like a code and also like a landscape, they are essential to "read" the defence actions as well. When you know the landscape you know where you are and where you are going. It is, frankly, really unrealistic, more than naive, utterly nonsense to think the defence was incompetent. Or that the defences are forced to avoid criticism of authorities for fear of incrimination. These things lie among the most childish and ludicrous rationalizations. When Luciano Ghirga and Giancarlo Costa decide not to submit any complaint against the police about being slapped, when the defences calls phychiatrist Caltagirone to try to explain a "false memory", and when you know the actual rules that is the actual landscape, then you know the meaning of the path they are following.

Ah, once again it is the Italian art of divining secret, hidden meanings in everything. Amanda talks in Mafia code, her defence is backed by Masons, the defence were competent despite failing to catch the myriad of dishonest prosecution manoeuvres, the prosecution were honest and open despite never handing over their raw data, and no doubt my reply reveals my hidden allegiance to the invincible PR supertanker.

 

[ericparoissien]

[QUOTE = Chris_Halkides; 10288023] Eric,Your earlier comment implied That pro-innocence commenters were applying two sets of standards to the evidence, one for Rudy and one for Amanda and Raffaele. At least we now know where you stand. If you can debunk the evidence against Rudy using similar arguments to Those That the PI commenters use, or if you can Shops provide a self-consistent narrative / timeline for what you think Happened (One That does not contradict well-established facts), I would be interested in what you have to say. [/QUOTE]
Chris,
Judge Nencini* said, in a different wording, "Amanda gave the final stab to the jugular", this statement is a fantastic deviation from his norm of intelligence and moderation if it is not supported by more evidence.
You'll have to do the same farfetched step to prove that there was a criminal move of Rudy on Meredith, and that he was not a regular person in a panic, in a double bind of helping and fleeing, considering his low credit profile.
I'm not saying, the burden is on you, because i will study it more closely and report here.
*I mean no disrespect for judge Nencini, i was amazed by the humaneness and intelligence of Italian judges, carabinieri, prison guards.
The defence slinging mud on Italian officials created a Golem.

 

[carbonjam72]

[QUOTE = Chris_Halkides; 10288023] Eric,Your earlier comment implied That pro-innocence commenters were applying two sets of standards to the evidence, one for Rudy and one for Amanda and Raffaele. At least we now know where you stand. If you can debunk the evidence against Rudy using similar arguments to Those That the PI commenters use, or if you can Shops provide a self-consistent narrative / timeline for what you think Happened (One That does not contradict well-established facts), I would be interested in what you have to say.

Chris,
Judge Nencini* said, in a different wording, "Amanda gave the final stab to the jugular", this statement is a fantastic deviation from his norm of intelligence and moderation if it is not supported by more evidence. You'll have to do the same farfetched step to prove that there was a criminal move of Rudy on Meredith, and that he was not a regular person in a panic, in a double bind of helping and fleeing, considering his low credit profile.
I'm not saying, the burden is on you, because i will study it more closely and report here.
*I mean no disrespect for judge Nencini, i was amazed by the humaneness and intelligence of Italian judges, carabinieri, prison guards.
The defence slinging mud on Italian officials created a Golem.

There is only evidence of Rudy Guede in the room where Meredith was murdered. He admits to being in the room when she bled to death. There is no evidence of anyone else in the room.

Why do you continue to insist that Amanda and Raf are in the same position as Rudy Guede, there is no evidence against Amanda and Raf, only Rudy.

Apart from your respect and admiration from the judge, prosecutors and Italian police, do you have any actual factual basis for your beliefs?

Or are you solely interested in creating multiple side-trackings to an extent that is breadth taking?

 

[Samson]

This is part of the quasi-Newtonian aspect of Italian law that makes it so unique. For every law or rule there is an equal and opposite one, except that the law or rule favoring the prosecution and against the defense is always at least a bit stronger.

Machiavelli adds value to this thread by perfectly encapsulating this law, and there is much to be considered with this concept alone.
He is not alone, though it is tempting to imagine he may be the devil's advocate from hell, or representing the amorphous characters from Kafka's trial.
But:
Lest this echo chamber is complacent,

Who would write this and propogate Nencini's fictional account of one evening in Perugia to all journalists he can find?

Innocenisti articles and reports in the mainstream media have been conspicuous by their absence this year. It's time for David Marriott to lie his king down on the chessboard. It's over.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

Fascinating, indeed, how much this entity's idiomatic English has improved over the course of this abstruse discussion. Either the difficulty of the subject matter has helped focus the mind, or there is a ghostwriter at work.

FWIW, I'm pretty sure this is Machster. There are certain words, phrases and nuances by which one can tell.

Furthermore, it is the hallmark of Machsterism to argue the defense most assuredly had everything it ever even considered asking for, and that the prosecution were completely forthcoming with all test results, never withholding any evidence whatsoever. Well, except for any and all evidence and discovery not requested on the precise form, on the correct day of the month, by the proper person who preceded each request with "please."

Truth be damned. Oh and the defendants? They're damned too. Too bad.

 

[Diocletus]

Those keys for a staging
Republic - November 14, 2007 Page 17 Section: CHRONICLE [1] (Google translation)

PERUGIA - Two keys connected with a ring. For the investigators have a 'further proof of the guilt of Amanda Knox, accused with Raffaele Sollecito and Patrick Lumumba' s murder of Meredith Kercher. Are key 'apartment below the one where the young Englishman was killed in the evening between the' one and two November. On that ground, with three other boys, lives Giacomo Silenzi, Meredith's boyfriend, on 3 November he had told police: "Before leaving for Porto San Giorgio I gave the keys to my house asking Meredith to disinfect one of my two cats that had injured her ear. " On 6 November, the two keys were found in the chamber of Amanda Knox. Not a clue just because the room of Stephen, one of the three tenants of silence were discovered traces of blood. The four students have vowed to clean the stains left by the injured cat el 'entire house before leaving for vacation of the Bridge of the Dead. I do not know how to explain the traces of blood on the duvet of Stephen - said James Silenzi - just remember that the blood there 'was, and that Stephen had locked the room. " Those traces of blood could be part of the screening, according to investigators, enacted by Amanda and his accomplices to dribble suspects. Even these mysterious bloodstains are finished to the laboratory of the forensic team in Rome, where began the analysis of findings.
...​

Yes, I've seen that. But what does it mean? Now that can show a way for Amanda to have gotten in downstairs the cat blood might be human blood?

Do you have a hallway/key pic from nov 3?

 

[Diocletus]

Also, if I'm reading right, this says that the bloody comforter belonged to Bonassi and it was his door that was locked. Why would Silenzi have a key to bonassi's room to have given to Meredith?

And surely, these keys would have been used at trial to assist with the framing . . . Unless somebody thought that for some reason it would hurt the cause.

 

[anglolawyer]

Also, if I'm reading right, this says that the bloody comforter belonged to Bonassi and it was his door that was locked. Why would Silenzi have a key to bonassi's room to have given to Meredith?

And surely, these keys would have been used at trial to assist with the framing . . . Unless somebody thought that for some reason it would hurt the cause.

So what conclusion have you reached? That someone got into Bonassis' room and left blood in there behind a locked door, without a key and leaving no sign of forced entry? Sounds like a job for a cat to me. Or at least that we need a heck of a lot more info than we have.

I thought btw her mission was to water the weed rather than tend the cat's ear. She didn't need a key for that, just a tin of kitty kat

 

[Diocletus]

What I'm thinking is that it wasn't Bonassi's room that was locked, it was silenzis. So the comforter wasn't behind a locked door.

It would have been more helpful if the cops had "found" a wounded cat somewhere. But alas, kitty is nowhere to be found.