Continuation Part 11: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Bill Williams]

Here's Prosecutor Crini's closing argument, in English, at the Florence trial. This is what the PM sought to prove, and believed he'd proved.

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Prosecution-Closing-Arguments-Excerpts.pdf

He starts in with Curatolo. Curatolo cannot simply be ruled out because he's drug addicted. Ok, there's no contest from the prosecution as to Curatolo's situation in life. But what did Crini present at court - other than asserting it - that the nature of Curatolo's drug addiction still makes him a trustworthy witness?

Anyway, the goal is to compare this with what Nencini writes in his own motivations report. How much of Nencini is simply a unique invention of his own, relying on nothing brought to his court?

ETA - it's all about Curatolo, with the two-truck driver thrown in. What a useless closing.

 

[Desert Fox]

Bill:
There certainly is a strange disconnect between the evidence and Nencini's judgement.

 

[Numbers]

Thanks for this. I see that at Mr Sollecito's flat there are 14 luminol hits and the extraction is mentioned as "saliva" in 13 of them and "blood" in one. What does this mean? Also, just 4 of these samples produced a profile, none of which is Ms Kercher's. Why have the samples been identified in this manner? The "blood" extraction is an unknown male. Could you perhaps take a look at these and the testing from Guede's apartment and unpack the data? From here:

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/luminoltests/

Thanks

Would you agree that we can rule out the presence of Ms Kercher's blood and/or DNA from the samples at Mr Sollecito's? Would you agree that the absence of transfer evidence - ie blood or other samples from Ms Kercher's room on either Ms Knox or Mr Sollecito's clothes or at his flat, if true of course, is an important piece of exonerating evidence?

I am truly a beginner regarding the details of DNA profiling, but I can provide some information that may be useful.

The "saliva" and "blood" references are to digital-information control cards used with the Qiagen EZ1 robot for DNA extraction. The card controls the detailed protocol used for DNA extraction and purification from a sample. I don't know how the protocols differ for blood and saliva. While I see in the Qiagen literature mention of blood and buccal cards, I have not seen one labeled as "saliva."

See:

http://projects.nfstc.org/workshops/resources/articles/EZ1 DNA Handbook.pdf

Protocols for nucleic acid purification are stored on pre-programmed EZ1 Cards
(integrated circuit cards). The user simply inserts an EZ1 Card into the BioRobot EZ1
and the workstation is then ready to run a protocol (Figure 1, page 9). The availability
of various protocols increases the flexibility of the BioRobot EZ1 system.

www.qiagen.com

The BioRobot EZ1 system allows fully automated purification of genomic DNA from whole blood.
Magnetic-particle technology used by the BioRobot EZ1 system provides high-quality genomic DNA,
which is suitable for direct use in downstream applications, such as PCR or other enzymatic reactions.
The BioRobot EZ1 performs all steps of the DNA isolation procedure, and the procedure allows
purification from varying amounts of starting material.

http://www.ucelecza.com/userfiles/f...tomated_Solutions_—_Pure_Convenience[1].pdf

The EZ1 Advanced and the EZ1 Advanced XL use proven EZ1 Kits with preprogrammed protocols
on EZ1 Advanced or EZ1 Advanced XL Cards. EZ1 Advanced Cards or EZ1 Advanced XL Cards
specify a choice of purification protocols without any manual data entry. As your range of applications
expands, new cards may be purchased — increasing your range of purification protocols without
any retraining or costly modifications to the instrument

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I read this passage of Nencini as sarcasm. I posted about it a few pages ago. And re-reading it he certainly seems to be saying the defence wanted to re-test the clasp, which is pretty weird IMO.

anglolawyer,

The only thing that makes sense is for the defense to have asked for some sort of review of the data already in existence. Nencini either misunderstood them, or he chose to misunderstand them. Obviously, I am speculating on this question.

 

[anglolawyer]

anglolawyer,

The only thing that makes sense is for the defense to have asked for some sort of review of the data already in existence. Nencini either misunderstood them, or he chose to misunderstand them.

That would be my guess. We need to see the memorandum.

 

[Bill Williams]

anglolawyer,

The only thing that makes sense is for the defense to have asked for some sort of review of the data already in existence. Nencini either misunderstood them, or he chose to misunderstand them.

My read of the Sollecito defence appeal to Cassazione (albeit through Google translate) shows no reference to this as an appeal point.

 

[Planigale]

I am curious about something kind of peripheral to this. . . .
We all know that the discussion of repressing memories and memory gaps are extremely unreliable. Are police and the legal fields educated on these problems? If not, would this becoming part of proper training help?

Certainly well accepted by UK Police who have interview techniques designed to avoid this.

http://www.app.college.police.uk/ap...s/investigative-interviewing/#peace-framework

 

[Kauffer]

Greetings from rainy Los Angeles!
I was reading in an old book I have and found this passage that intrigues yet bothers me,
it's about the original Massei Trial:

Forensic expert Vincenzo Pascali quit in May, leaving a big hole in the Sollecito team...
<snip>
He was replaced by Francesco Introna, a close friend of Raffaele's father and a brilliant Pugliese scholar who spoke English to the foreign press. During his testimony, Introna dramatically plunged a knife into the neck of a mannequin to prove his point to the jury. He testified that Meredith was killed by just one person, Rudy Guede, who grabbed her from behind and stabbed her in the neck.

A month later, Amanda's own forensic expert, Carlo Torre, told the court that yes, Meredith had been killed by one person, Rudy Guede, but that she had been stabbed from the front. If the defense experts could not even agree on the details of the murder, what hope was there for the jury to take their side?*
* * *

I sometimes ask questions about this case we discuss because heck, if the 2 defense forensic experts couldn't agree on how Meredith was killed, I'm gonna keep an open mind about most everything in this horrible murder case...

Today for example,
I still wonder about the details of a finding that I became better aware of.
Why are there a strangers fingerprints on a womans underwear drawer?
We're talking about a rape and murder.
Laura's fingerprints are there, but someone elses too.
Whose?

CarbonJam72 gave me some thoughts about his/her theory the other day,
But I disagree, I think they mean something.

Read these 2 snippets from Old Perugia Shock I posted the other day:
Scientific police have the technician who makes the prints visible, the one who takes pictures of them, the one who chooses the readable ones (those that have at least 16 points at a fair distance) and the one who looks for matches comparing them with the suspects fingerprints or with the database.

At the end 108 pictures were taken, each one containing one to three signs. It would be too long to say what was found where. Also there's a bit of confusion with full or partial fingerprints or stains but at the end we may say that of these signs 97 could be said to be fingerprints. 47 belonged to Meredith Kercher, 17 to Rudy Guede, 5 to Raffaele Sollecito, 5 to Filomena Romanelli, 5 to Laura Mezzetti, 4 to Giacomo Silenzi, 1 to Amanda Knox, 13 were not attributed to anyone.<snip>
Scientific police were not surprised at all that there was only one Amanda's fingerprint in the whole house. On a glass there were 3 signs, one of them was recognized as Amanda's fingerprint. The other 2 signs, unreadable, must be the other fingers she used to grab the glass.

Link:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10347527&postcount=3005


Amanda left most likely 3 fingerprints on the glass.
But only 1 made it as a complete enough to have made the 97 List of Fingerprints.

Laura left 5 fingerprints.
And there are 13 unattributed fingerprints that made the list.
And it appears at least 1, FR. 17 is on this womans underwear drawer, found pulled open.

Link:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10347501&postcount=3004

Question for you all:
How many unattributed fingerprints would be found on your underwear drawer right now
if it were found pulled open when you came home from work, visiting friends or a night out on the town?

In this rape and murder, this unattributed fingerprint,
along with the 1's from the kitchen sink area, seen below
[qimg]http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/280x200q90/208/icre.jpg[/qimg]
with blue handle knives nearby, bothers me...
RW


(*) -Book: Angel Face Author B. Nadeau Pages 154-155
PS - I read both sides of the story, help me gain perspective, so to say.
Sorry if it bothers anyone...

The fingerprints were allocated in the way you state? Really? This is in which report/transcript/motivation?

Is an underwear drawer print really such a mystery? A boyfriend? A girlfriend? Old tenant? Landlady? I mean the list while not endless would be large. Was it always an underwear drawer?

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi Kauffer,
Thanks for reading my post.
Here's info from a couple of sources,
and yes, the Perugia Shock info has been around for years too...

Never much discussion about this possible evidence though..
If you get a chance, blow up the photo here
http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Cottage-Fingerprint-Map.jpg
and see where all the unattributed fingerprints are.

They are not from Rudy, Raffaele, Giacomo, Meredith, Amanda, Filomena or Laura.

Though some do not like it, this site has more info about the location of the prints:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Fingerprints


Perugia Shock's Frank Sfarzo was in court when these were discussed.
His insight is nice, stating how many photo's were taken, what criteria was used and how many made the cut as being usable for identification. If you have time, read the link #'s 3004+3005 to my 2 recent posts, they cover the stuff well. Look at photo's of the locations of these prints, watch the crime scene video and you too might wonder about them like I do.

2 on Meredith's door?
On the sink near the knives?
On an open underwear drawer?
On Amanda's clothing closet doors?

I'd really like to know how many of the 13 unattributed fingerprints were from the same person and their location...

 

[RWVBWL]

But where is the Dec. 7, 2007 Interrogation of Rudy Guede?

Greetings all,
I've been wanting to read all of Rudy Guede's Interrogations for awhile.

He 1st stated that the attacker had black hair while in German custody, IIRC.

Here's an English translation of his March 26, 2008 Interrogation.
On Amanda Knox's website, she only has the Italian version...

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/rudy-guede-deposition-march-2008/

But still I can not find a full account of the 7 hour long December 7, 2007 Interrogation of Rudy Guede with PM Mignini and Judge Matteini.

I asked this recently on Injustice in Perugia:
Hey Charlie Wilkes, Bruce Fisher, Teddy, Dan O. and others:
can you get it, translate it and post it for public viewing?
Much thanks!
RW

 

[Kauffer]

Hi Kauffer,
Thanks for reading my post.
Here's info from a couple of sources,
and yes, the Perugia Shock info has been around for years too...

Never much discussion about this possible evidence though..
If you get a chance, blow up the photo here
http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Cottage-Fingerprint-Map.jpg
and see where all the unattributed fingerprints are.

They are not from Rudy, Raffaele, Giacomo, Meredith, Amanda, Filomena or Laura.

Though some do not like it, this site has more info about the location of the prints:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Fingerprints


Perugia Shock's Frank Sfarzo was in court when these were discussed.
His insight is nice, stating how many photo's were taken, what criteria was used and how many made the cut as being usable for identification. If you have time, read the link #'s 3004+3005 to my 2 recent posts, they cover the stuff well. Look at photo's of the locations of these prints, watch the crime scene video and you too might wonder about them like I do.

2 on Meredith's door?
On the sink near the knives?
On an open underwear drawer?
On Amanda's clothing closet doors?

I'd really like to know how many of the 13 unattributed fingerprints were from the same person and their location...

Yes I've checked these. Where are the 17 Guede prints for example?

 

[Desert Fox]

Certainly well accepted by UK Police who have interview techniques designed to avoid this.

http://www.app.college.police.uk/ap...s/investigative-interviewing/#peace-framework

I notice checkable facts is listed. . . .The Italian police seemed to have gone off the rails right there already.

 

[RWVBWL]

Yes I've checked these. Where are the 17 Guede prints for example?

Hi Kaufer,
Good question,
that's how we figure things out,
always question what we read or are told!


I only saw the 1 on the pillow,
I do not know where all 97 of the fingerprints are that Frank Sfarzo writes of.
Maybe he goofed and meant to write that Laura had 17 and Rudy 5?
She has a lot shown on that image.

I'm doing something right now,
maybe some one can count all the fingerprints seen in the image and compare them to what Perugia Shock stated.

Or find out exactly how many and from whom they belong to be checking in the Court documents.

I'll count what I see and post later if no one else does...
RW

 

[carbonjam72]

Originally Posted by RWVBWL
For some reason I don't see an "af" on the bloody wall finger marks seen above.
Nor an "AF" either...

Just some bloody finger marks dragged downward.

Of course it is. The "AF" is only Rudy's crazy explanation.
He says he wrote something on the wall and there is no other trace that could be interpreted as any writing. So this must be what he wanted to explain.

I think there are two of Rudy's finger smears, one above the bed, and one on the inside of the wardrobe.

You guys looked at the clean straight one above the bed.

Here's the one from the dresser. You can kinda see AF if you squint, and maybe experience one of Rudy's blackout fugue states.

dsc_0282.jpg

file is too big, but here's the link to the zip. Maybe someone else has it handy?

https://mega.co.nz/#!bkRUlRwB!0Kvx6N3jXuc6vcndPfbzfmqcFfEHT7YDKme5JabFaaA

 

[carbonjam72]

Here's Prosecutor Crini's closing argument, in English, at the Florence trial. This is what the PM sought to prove, and believed he'd proved.

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Prosecution-Closing-Arguments-Excerpts.pdf

He starts in with Curatolo. Curatolo cannot simply be ruled out because he's drug addicted. Ok, there's no contest from the prosecution as to Curatolo's situation in life. But what did Crini present at court - other than asserting it - that the nature of Curatolo's drug addiction still makes him a trustworthy witness?

Anyway, the goal is to compare this with what Nencini writes in his own motivations report. How much of Nencini is simply a unique invention of his own, relying on nothing brought to his court?

ETA - it's all about Curatolo, with the two-truck driver thrown in. What a useless closing.

What's this you're referring to?

 

[moije2]

Mignini closing arguments - transcripts

Here's Prosecutor Crini's closing argument, in English, at the Florence trial. This is what the PM sought to prove, and believed he'd proved.

http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Prosecution-Closing-Arguments-Excerpts.pdf

He starts in with Curatolo. Curatolo cannot simply be ruled out because he's drug addicted. Ok, there's no contest from the prosecution as to Curatolo's situation in life. But what did Crini present at court - other than asserting it - that the nature of Curatolo's drug addiction still makes him a trustworthy witness?

Anyway, the goal is to compare this with what Nencini writes in his own motivations report. How much of Nencini is simply a unique invention of his own, relying on nothing brought to his court?

ETA - it's all about Curatolo, with the two-truck driver thrown in. What a useless closing.

Thanks for sending me back to the list of transcripts. I have always wanted to read Mignini's closing statements. I believe he was characterized as a powerful speaker. It is somewhat curious to me that the transcripts of his closing statements are missing. What's up with that? Are they available somewhere? Love to hear/read his oration.

 

[carbonjam72]

Unattributed WHY? Because the prints are unreadable, or from unknown persons?

Greetings from rainy Los Angeles!
I was reading in an old book I have and found this passage that intrigues yet bothers me,
it's about the original Massei Trial:

Forensic expert Vincenzo Pascali quit in May, leaving a big hole in the Sollecito team...
<snip>
He was replaced by Francesco Introna, a close friend of Raffaele's father and a brilliant Pugliese scholar who spoke English to the foreign press. During his testimony, Introna dramatically plunged a knife into the neck of a mannequin to prove his point to the jury. He testified that Meredith was killed by just one person, Rudy Guede, who grabbed her from behind and stabbed her in the neck.

A month later, Amanda's own forensic expert, Carlo Torre, told the court that yes, Meredith had been killed by one person, Rudy Guede, but that she had been stabbed from the front. If the defense experts could not even agree on the details of the murder, what hope was there for the jury to take their side?*
* * *

I sometimes ask questions about this case we discuss because heck, if the 2 defense forensic experts couldn't agree on how Meredith was killed, I'm gonna keep an open mind about most everything in this horrible murder case...

Today for example,
I still wonder about the details of a finding that I became better aware of.
Why are there a strangers fingerprints on a womans underwear drawer?
We're talking about a rape and murder.
Laura's fingerprints are there, but someone elses too.
Whose?

CarbonJam72 gave me some thoughts about his/her theory the other day,
But I disagree, I think they mean something.

Read these 2 snippets from Old Perugia Shock I posted the other day:
Scientific police have the technician who makes the prints visible, the one who takes pictures of them, the one who chooses the readable ones (those that have at least 16 points at a fair distance) and the one who looks for matches comparing them with the suspects fingerprints or with the database.

At the end 108 pictures were taken, each one containing one to three signs. It would be too long to say what was found where. Also there's a bit of confusion with full or partial fingerprints or stains but at the end we may say that of these signs 97 could be said to be fingerprints. 47 belonged to Meredith Kercher, 17 to Rudy Guede, 5 to Raffaele Sollecito, 5 to Filomena Romanelli, 5 to Laura Mezzetti, 4 to Giacomo Silenzi, 1 to Amanda Knox, 13 were not attributed to anyone.<snip>
Scientific police were not surprised at all that there was only one Amanda's fingerprint in the whole house. On a glass there were 3 signs, one of them was recognized as Amanda's fingerprint. The other 2 signs, unreadable, must be the other fingers she used to grab the glass.

Link:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10347527&postcount=3005


Amanda left most likely 3 fingerprints on the glass.
But only 1 made it as a complete enough to have made the 97 List of Fingerprints.

Laura left 5 fingerprints.
And there are 13 unattributed fingerprints that made the list.
And it appears at least 1, FR. 17 is on this womans underwear drawer, found pulled open.

Link:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10347501&postcount=3004

Question for you all:
How many unattributed fingerprints would be found on your underwear drawer right now
if it were found pulled open when you came home from work, visiting friends or a night out on the town?

In this rape and murder, this unattributed fingerprint,
along with the 1's from the kitchen sink area, seen below
[qimg]http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/280x200q90/208/icre.jpg[/qimg]
with blue handle knives nearby, bothers me...
RW


(*) -Book: Angel Face Author B. Nadeau Pages 154-155
PS - I read both sides of the story, help me gain perspective, so to say.
Sorry if it bothers anyone...

"He", thank you, and how dare you sir!

The only point I'm making is that there's a difference between a fingerprint that is unattributed because its smudgy, incomplete or otherwise unreadable - AND, a fingerprint that is crisp and clear, but simply isn't a match for any of the known reference fingerprints.

The latter implies the presence of unknown additional persons. The former doesn't allow us to exclude that the prints were left by people who lived there, or were there legitimately, and deposited at a different time of the crime.

It's the dating of when the prints were left that's the biggest problem with saying they have probative value. Someone who had no business ever being there, like Rudy, would have some 'splaining' to do.

Can you tell me that you acknowledge the difference, and which are you referring to for your belief that others were present - BASED ON THESE UNATTRIBUTED PRINTS?

Why do you believe the prints were unattributed? Because they can't be read? Or because they can be read, but we don't know whose they are?

 

[carbonjam72]

For anyone still clinging to the belief Amanda and Raf ever "lied".

I am curious about something kind of peripheral to this. . . .
We all know that the discussion of repressing memories and memory gaps are extremely unreliable. Are police and the legal fields educated on these problems? If not, would this becoming part of proper training help?

Pretty great article on this point in the NY Times today, here's the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/opinion/why-our-memory-fails-us.html?_r=0

And a short quote, some might read very closely, and slowly, until they get it:

"Do our heroes have memories of clay? Dr. Tyson, Mr. Bush and Mrs. Clinton are all intelligent, educated people. Ordinary memory failures say nothing about a person’s honesty or competence. But how we respond to these events can be telling.

Politicians should respond as Dr. Tyson eventually did: Stop stonewalling, admit error, note that such things happen, apologize and move on. But the rest of us aren’t off the hook. It is just as misguided to conclude that someone who misremembers must be lying as it is to defend a false memory in the face of contradictory evidence. We should be more understanding of mistakes by others, and credit them when they admit they were wrong. We are all fabulists, and we must all get used to it."

 

[Bill Williams]

ETA - it's all about Curatolo, with the two-truck driver thrown in. What a useless closing.

What's this you're referring to?

Tow truck driver. It's been that sort of day.

 

[RWVBWL]

"af"

I think there are two of Rudy's finger smears, one above the bed, and one on the inside of the wardrobe.

You guys looked at the clean straight one above the bed.

Here's the one from the dresser. You can kinda see AF if you squint, and maybe experience one of Rudy's blackout fugue states.

dsc_0282.jpg

file is too big, but here's the link to the zip. Maybe someone else has it handy?

https://mega.co.nz/#!bkRUlRwB!0Kvx6N3jXuc6vcndPfbzfmqcFfEHT7YDKme5JabFaaA

Hiya CarbonJam72,
I tried to download and view your file,
it was taking too long on my slow connection.

But this has to be the image you have in mind, right?

I can see Rudy's "af" in it.
And I'm not even high or trippin'...
I don't think that Meredith was tryin' to say "Raff-a-ele", "Raff-a-ele", "Raff-a-ele".

Meredith was probably tryin to say "aw ****", "aw ****", "aw ****"...

My opinion only,
Gotta run, see ya,
RW