• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation Part 10: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kaosium said:
How could I? I've not seen it. I'm responding to a hypothetical where she didn't and pointing out there may be other reasons that the one you've fixated on.

One thing I do know: there's no reason to hide them if there wasn't anything interesting there and that the defense wanted them and didn't get them. Also that the misdirection, sophistry and outright lies on this subject by the prosecution's sycophants is entertaining to behold!
Click to expand...

In fact there is no hiding of them.

There is also two judge appointed experts who stated (repeatedly) that they were satisfied with what Stefanoni gave tham and that the obtained all data they had requested. And they praised the polizia scientifica laboratory for their complete cooperation.

The same two experts were caught lying on egregious points of their work but that's another issue.

There is only a group of defence-supporters who are whining that the defence doesn't have raw data files, only because they have lost, the trial is over and they have no other arguments left. They can only scream conspiracy.
 
-

Stop withholding evidence, judge orders Amanda Knox prosecution
Posted on May 9, 2011 | By Candace Dempsey

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2...evidence-judge-tells-amanda-knox-prosecution/

" ...We finally know the defense was right: Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, a police forensic biologist, has never delivered key paperwork about the DNA traces that pinned Knox to the murder weapon and Raffaele Sollecito, her ex-Italian boyfriend, to the crime scene. These samples, found way back in 2007, were crucial to the 2009 conviction of the two college students for the murder of Meredith Kercher, Knox's British roommate... "

(...)

"April 7, 2011: In a fax to Judge Hellmann, independent expert Dr. Conti emphasizes the importance of receiving all relevant data from the police lab, whether 'found, or partially found, in the court records or acquisitions.' In other words: 'everything integral to the investigation of the two items of evidence,' whether it had already been presented in court or not. The judge swiftly approves Conti's request for key files.

"April 14, 2011: Judge Hellmann's court clerk (Maria Centorrini) faxes Dr. Stefanoni, telling her to send 'as soon as possible' the items requested by Conti, the independent expert. She attaches Conti's requests, already approved by the judge:

"The alleged murder weapon: an ordinary kitchen knife from Raffaele Sollecito's apartment. There is no proof that it was ever carried to the crime scene. Judge Giancarlo Massei claimed that Knox was carrying this knife in her cloth bag, because she worked in a dangerous neighborhood. However, she didn't go to work the night of the murder. No blood or DNA from the victim was found inside the cloth bag.

"1. CD of the electropherograms relating to the bra clasp and knife deposed 10/8/2008 during preliminary hearings and found at Raffaele’s flat on Nov. 6, 2007.

"2. CD RAW DATA (data relative to the general electrophoretic runs of the automatic sequencer).

"3. All the transcriptions, in all the phases, of the depositions of Dr. Stefanoni and of the CTP, including the documentation deposed (considerations and notes, including possible CDs).

"4. CD film, photos, search reports on methods of checking evidence into custody, preservation, and transport to the police laboratory.

"On April 20, 2011, Stefanoni send an 'urgente' fax to the judge. She balks at producing the data and adds that the raw files request is too vague for her. The boldface and convoluted language below is hers, word for word:

"In reference to the acquisition of the CD containing a collection of DNA profiles (in the form of electropherograms), copies of the same were presented and had already been deposed in the court records on 9/25/2008 by Judge Paolo Micheli of the Perugia Court, and that all of the electropherograms pertaining to the genetic profiles extrapolated by the technical analyses have been gathered into a separate attached book separate from the body of the report.

"Too low: Stefanoni's handwritten notes from her tests on the famous murder weapon. If the machine said too low, doesn't that indicate not enough DNA? Not in the Rome lab.

"In reference to the request of acquisition of CD RAW DATA, one is obligated to explain that the information in the form of this file in the sequencer is never an integral part of the technical report, as far as the object being tested by the forensic geneticist, namely the DNA profile, and that it is already reported in the electropherogram printout, connected to the technical report on which all of the useful date and an evaluation of the genetic profile are reported.

"In addition, it is good to clarify that the files contained in the denominated sequencer 'Sample File.fsa' contain subfolders denominated 'Info,' 'Raw Data' and 'EPT Data' that do not allow any human intervention in order to modify and/or add data; and therefore, in this view, do not contribute to furnishing later elements to the genetic data evaluation.

"Finally, the request asked for by the expert consultants relative to the acquisition of the CD RAW DATA appears incomplete in so much as the name of the 'sample file' requested was not specified, without which the exact identification of the documented material the acquisition of which is asked for is not possible.

"Cough up the files, Judge Hellmann immediately tells her in a terse, hand-written note that very same day. Resolve your own 'perplexity,' he adds.

"'Dear Doctor Stefanoni,

"'I received your faxed note dated April 20th and take note of the relevant content. I ask you, however, regarding the official experts to kindly give to them copies of your and my responses communicated at the same time, consigning directly to them what is of interest, useful to acquire with the goal of completing the investigations, subject to the clarification of the perplexity that you mention... '"

-
 
-

Stop withholding evidence, judge orders Amanda Knox prosecution
Posted on May 9, 2011 | By Candace Dempsey

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2...evidence-judge-tells-amanda-knox-prosecution/


"1. CD of the electropherograms relating to the bra clasp and knife deposed 10/8/2008 during preliminary hearings and found at Raffaele’s flat on Nov. 6, 2007.

"2. CD RAW DATA (data relative to the general electrophoretic runs of the automatic sequencer).

"3. All the transcriptions, in all the phases, of the depositions of Dr. Stefanoni and of the CTP, including the documentation deposed (considerations and notes, including possible CDs).

"4. CD film, photos, search reports on methods of checking evidence into custody, preservation, and transport to the police laboratory.

-
 
Last edited:
-

Stop withholding evidence, judge orders Amanda Knox prosecution
Posted on May 9, 2011 | By Candace Dempsey

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2...evidence-judge-tells-amanda-knox-prosecution/



"On April 20, 2011, Stefanoni send an 'urgente' fax to the judge. She balks at producing the data and adds that the raw files request is too vague for her. The boldface and convoluted language below is hers, word for word:

"In reference to the acquisition of the CD containing a collection of DNA profiles (in the form of electropherograms), copies of the same were presented and had already been deposed in the court records on 9/25/2008 by Judge Paolo Micheli of the Perugia Court, and that all of the electropherograms pertaining to the genetic profiles extrapolated by the technical analyses have been gathered into a separate attached book separate from the body of the report.

"Too low: Stefanoni's handwritten notes from her tests on the famous murder weapon. If the machine said too low, doesn't that indicate not enough DNA? Not in the Rome lab.

"In reference to the request of acquisition of CD RAW DATA, one is obligated to explain that the information in the form of this file in the sequencer is never an integral part of the technical report, as far as the object being tested by the forensic geneticist, namely the DNA profile, and that it is already reported in the electropherogram printout, connected to the technical report on which all of the useful date and an evaluation of the genetic profile are reported.

"In addition, it is good to clarify that the files contained in the denominated sequencer 'Sample File.fsa' contain subfolders denominated 'Info,' 'Raw Data' and 'EPT Data' that do not allow any human intervention in order to modify and/or add data; and therefore, in this view, do not contribute to furnishing later elements to the genetic data evaluation.

"Finally, the request asked for by the expert consultants relative to the acquisition of the CD RAW DATA appears incomplete in so much as the name of the 'sample file' requested was not specified, without which the exact identification of the documented material the acquisition of which is asked for is not possible.

-
 
The same problems with lack of discovery were noted by several people

Machiavelli said:
The simple fact is the raw data were not requested, the only instance of request was that ambiguous statement by Dalla Vedova at the end of the 2009 trial, which he faild to explain or to word properly, and judges and prosecution apparently didn't understand. There is no other instance in the trial papers, which draws a very different picture from what Chris Mellas describes: the "multiple occasions" story is a lie.
Click to expand...
Machiavelli,

What Chris Mellas said is consistent with what Jason Gilder said and with What Carlo dalla Vedova said. The defense made multiple requests, and they have been crystal-clear in what they have said publicly. Comodi did not say that she did not understand; she said that the prosecution gets to decide what the defense can see. It is a shame that you don't put as much time into reforming discovery laws as you do into defending the indefensible.
 
-

Stop withholding evidence, judge orders Amanda Knox prosecution
Posted on May 9, 2011 | By Candace Dempsey

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2...evidence-judge-tells-amanda-knox-prosecution/



"Cough up the files, Judge Hellmann immediately tells her in a terse, hand-written note that very same day. Resolve your own 'perplexity,' he adds.

"'Dear Doctor Stefanoni,

"'I received your faxed note dated April 20th and take note of the relevant content. I ask you, however, regarding the official experts to kindly give to them copies of your and my responses communicated at the same time, consigning directly to them what is of interest, useful to acquire with the goal of completing the investigations, subject to the clarification of the perplexity that you mention... '"

-
 
"Cough up the files, Judge Hellmann immediately tells her... "

-

Stop withholding evidence, judge orders Amanda Knox prosecution
Posted on May 9, 2011 | By Candace Dempsey

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2...evidence-judge-tells-amanda-knox-prosecution/



"Cough up the files, Judge Hellmann immediately tells her in a terse, hand-written note that very same day. Resolve your own 'perplexity,' he adds.

"'Dear Doctor Stefanoni,

"'I received your faxed note dated April 20th and take note of the relevant content. I ask you, however, regarding the official experts to kindly give to them copies of your and my responses communicated at the same time, consigning directly to them what is of interest, useful to acquire with the goal of completing the investigations, subject to the clarification of the perplexity that you mention... '"

-
 
Last edited:
Machiavelli said:
But the machine obviously only reads the raw data, whenever you print a chart. But all charts were printed under the incidente probatorio procedure
, there was a summoning of parties, there was open access to the laboratory and there was an investigating judge, Stefanoni was doing nothing alone or secretly. Those documents are produced in a session "together" by the parties, so the law sees them.
Click to expand...

Bull. She cranked up her machine, fed the raw data in, and created a printout consistent with what the prosecution wanted the court to see. The scale of the printout is the least of concerns. She also made sure that the charts did not indicate the testing dates (who has ever heard if such a practice?). Moreover, she didn't print out the profiles that she didn't want the defense to see, eg, profiles that would show contamination and equipment malfunction.
 
William Thompson on full discovery

Kaosium said:
How could I? I've not seen it. I'm responding to a hypothetical where she didn't and pointing out there may be other reasons that the one you've fixated on.

One thing I do know: there's no reason to hide them if there wasn't anything interesting there and that the defense wanted them and didn't get them. Also that the misdirection, sophistry and outright lies on this subject by the prosecution's sycophants is entertaining to behold! :p
Click to expand...
+1
One wishes that anonymous PG posters would spend as much time reading what forensic scientists say about the importance of the electronic data files as they do deflecting, while pretending to ponder imponderables.

“Full disclosure allows a thorough independent review of results and thereby helps assure that the underlying scientific methods are strong and appropriate, and that the laboratory’s interpretations are fair and accurate. Until the electronic data are made available, I cannot say that I have performed a complete review of the underlying evidence in this matter.”
-William Thompson, Victoria State Coroner’s Inquest into Death of Jaidyn Leskie
 
Diocletus said:
Bull. She cranked up her machine, fed the raw data in, and created a printout consistent with what the prosecution wanted the court to see. The scale of the printout is the least of concerns. She also made sure that the charts did not indicate the testing dates (who has ever heard if such a practice?). Moreover, she didn't print out the profiles that she didn't want the defense to see, eg, profiles that would show contamination and equipment malfunction.
Click to expand...

If you have evidence of this alleged crime - whoever has evidence of some kind of this alleged crime - is welcome, should submit a denouncement to Italian judicial authorities, presenting their evidence and testimony, demanding an investigation into this. This is also the way to see the raw data.
 
calling all PG-posters

All PG-posters,

Do you support full release of the EDFs? The standard operating procedures? Contamination log files and corrective action files?
 
Chris_Halkides said:
+1
One wishes that anonymous PG posters would spend as much time reading what forensic scientists say about the importance of the electronic data files as they do deflecting, while pretending to ponder imponderables.

“Full disclosure allows a thorough independent review of results and thereby helps assure that the underlying scientific methods are strong and appropriate, and that the laboratory’s interpretations are fair and accurate. Until the electronic data are made available, I cannot say that I have performed a complete review of the underlying evidence in this matter.”
-William Thompson, Victoria State Coroner’s Inquest into Death of Jaidyn Leskie
Click to expand...

You forgot to quote the instances of the "multiple times" the defence demanded to have raw data, those multiple requests you talked about.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
All PG-posters,

Do you support full release of the EDFs? The standard operating procedures? Contamination log files and corrective action files?
Click to expand...

I support the respect of the law, and of truth. I am indifferent "the release of" this or that as topics taken in isolation.
 
Last edited:
Professor Krane on the lack of discovery

Machiavelli said:
I support the respect of the law. I am indifferent "the release of" this or that as topics taken in isolation.
Click to expand...
Thank you for completely dodging the question in a way that is unmistakable to even a casual reader of this thread. Professor Dan Krane wrote, “The biggest concern that I personally have regarding this case is the refusal of the prosecution to provide the defense with a copy of the electronic data that underlies the DNA test results -- that is virtually unheard of world-wide today and it would be especially important to review that data in a case such as this which seems to involve such low level samples.”
 
Machiavelli said:
If you have evidence of this alleged crime - whoever has evidence of some kind of this alleged crime - is welcome, should submit a denouncement to Italian judicial authorities, presenting their evidence and testimony, demanding an investigation into this. This is also the way to see the raw data.
Click to expand...

Haha. That's like complaining to the godfather about the actions of a capo.
 
Nencini and the undiscovered country

Charlie Wilkes said:
Bongiorno was in a room full of people who are too stupid to care about EDFs or even understand what they are. She was responding to a prosecutor who claimed that Meredith freaked out because Guede didn't flush the toilet, and Amanda killed her in response to that. Seriously.

As for the EDFs... I'd like to know why Stefanoni hasn't spoken up, now that a luminary in the field of forensic DNA, Peter Gill, has cited her slovenly work as his central case study, in a book called "Misleading DNA Evidence." That's gotta hurt. And it damn well should hurt, for all the damage Stefanoni has done.
Click to expand...
This. To take one example, the defense demonstrated their theory of how the window was broken, but the prosecution never did. Yet Nencini was indifferent to reexamining the issue. Another example is Nencini's refusal of audio testing. The little new data Nencini did turn up was exculpatory, but he convicted anyway. Petty functionaries might have their place in the world, but a job in which one decides whether someone can be put away for thirty years isn't one of them.
 
I SUPPORT...

-

Chris_Halkides said:
All PG-posters,

Do you support full release of the EDFs? The standard operating procedures? Contamination log files and corrective action files?
Click to expand...
-

I'm not a believer in probable guilt, but this is really something (if only for the cause of justice) we should all be able to agree on, if we never agree on anything else.

I SUPPORT (IN MEMORY OF MEREDITH KERCHER):

1) The full release of the EDF files first, and then secondly, the standard operating procedures (SOPs), and any and all contamination snd corrective action files.

And I also personally SUPPORT

2) The opening of the alleged murder weapon and examined by someone other that Doctor Stefanoni, someone appointed by the ISC, or the ECHR (if possible),

In short, I'm willing to put my whole belief (that Raffaele and Amanda are probably innocent) on the line, because (especially) if they open the knife (and it's done by someone respected in the forensics field by both sides) and they find an abundant amount of blood and Meredith's DNA under there (subject to public review of all data, raw or otherwise --including a video of the whole procedure, and the EDFs), I'll believe it's more probable that they are guilty.

I really don't see any reason why anyone wouldn't support this, unless they're afraid they'll be proven wrong,

d

-
 
Last edited:
three strikes and you are out in anybody's baseball game

Machiavelli said:
I think I was sufficiently clear saying the defence didn't request them. Because we are talking about defence requests.
Nobody has shown I am wrong.
Click to expand...
I have three sources that say you are: Gilder, Mellas, and dalla Vedova. I quoted two of them just yesterday.
 
Machiavelli said:
I support the respect of the law, and of truth. I am indifferent "the release of" this or that as topics taken in isolation.
Click to expand...

Here's the Rudy's skype conversation with his friend while Rudy was still in Germnay and on the run, provided with english translation for those of us who don't speak Italian. (Just posted today I think).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAq7c7SjxYA&feature=youtu.be

Mach, would you be able to tell us if you believe this audio clip is authentic, is that really Rudy talking about Meredith's murder with his friend?

And does the fact that the only person confirmed by physical evidence to have been present while Meredith bled to death, Rudy Guede, does his saying Amanda wasn't involved cause you to believe Amanda wasn't involved?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom