Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Grinder]

Whilst I wait for you cretins to sort it out..... can we get back to Vixen's implied claim that Stefanoni's DNA forensics is still the gold standard for the Kercher murder case?

Or Vixen's implied claim that the March 2015 ISC overturned the convictions on the slimmest of technicalities?

..... whilst none of that is true.

Blimey why would we bloody well do that?

Of course, as always you have struck to heart of the matter. Along with Curatolo the PGP refusing to acknowledge the unacceptability of her work and the rest of the ICSI crew s the mind. The "well if the DNA isn't good for Amanda and Raffaele why is good for Rudi" is beyond mindless not withstanding (you Limeys use that word) the DNA isn't needed for his conviction. I completely nonplussed by their inability to see these faults.

Perhaps V can shed light on how PGP can watch the technician photographer drag the swab on the sink and then claim AK's DNA is mixed with Mez'

 

[carbonjam72]

Whilst I wait for you cretins to sort it out..... can we get back to Vixen's implied claim that Stefanoni's DNA forensics is still the gold standard for the Kercher murder case?

Or Vixen's implied claim that the March 2015 ISC overturned the convictions on the slimmest of technicalities?

..... whilst none of that is true.

As for Vixen hailing from the UK, didn't one post mention some obscure welsh sport like cheese rolling?

At any rate, I'll bet dollars to donuts he is a he, (unless Bill agrees).

I don't think Vixen has taken any firm position, but rather seems to imply guilty sounding factoids,

Similar in some degree, to dearly departed CoulsdonUK, except a half step bolder, or even a Platinov, minus the cryptic metaphors.

I think what most pro guilt posters don't get here, is that most here are hungry to find one decent argument or fact that could reasonably be interpreted as indicating a possibility of guilt. And not out of a desire to believe guilt, but out of a desperate wish that our fellows who believe guilt are in some way recognizable as decent, honest, thoughtful and sane.

 

[Dan O.]

Why didn't the defense demand the semen stain be tested? It is up to the prosecution and the defense to present the evidence. All the judges do is sit on their backsides and review it. Why didn't Bongiorno put in a Disclosure Order? Are you saying she is a dullard? In Honor Bound Raf said the defense did not want to.

Seriously.

Where is the upside for the defense? Other than showing that the prosecution is nothing but a bunch of bafoons, at best the stain is Rudy's semen which could have been left on the pillow up to an hour prior to the murder up to when the duvet was cast over the body and the room door locked. Worst case is if someone in the prosecution delibrately tainted the stain so it would test positive for Raffaele's DNA.

The interesting question is why did the prosecution (and the civil attorney) jump up to block testing? The prosecution needs to cover for their earlier mistake of not testing the stain (or for their coverup if they did test it) by making excuses for why it should not have been tested. The civil party has one goal and that is extracting money from Raffaele and Amanda. The task of showing the suspect's involvement in the rape and murder of their client's daughter/sister becomes more difficult as more evidence points only to Rudy Guede. If the civil attorneys thought there was any chance that the stain would test positive for Raffaele they would have been demanding that it be tested.

 

[acbytesla]

Righto. Duly noted. You make it sound like there is a clash of ideology between two different religious sects.

Please credit me with a mind of my own. Then we will all get along nicely

For my part, please ensure your comments are sharp as I cannot suffer a fool.

In a way it is a clash of ideologies Vixen, but the real difference is the approach. This is a skeptics forum. You can expect to have your posts dissected and challenged even if we agree with most of your post. This happens to us all.

You can also expect to have misstatements of facts corrected. Few people anywhere are as knowledgeable about this case as the people posting here. Sources and citations are frequently requested of and by everyone. There probably is not a better place to learn the facts of this case than this site.

As a former member of Mensa ( former, because they discovered I was just not that smart) I look forward to reading your thoughts. I hope you are interested in learning and not just debating.

Right now, it seems as if you have your head filled with misinformation and that has colored your opnion. That's OK, I also at one time believed in their guilt. I had been a frequent visitor to TJMK, PMF.NET and .ORG. I read Vogt, Nadeau and various news articles. Unfortunately, many of these sources are filled with falsehoods, interlaced throughout. I soon discovered that much of the foundation that I based my opinion was wortnless.

Real intellects have the courage to change their minds.

 

[Grinder]

Where is the upside for the defense? Other than showing that the prosecution is nothing but a bunch of bafoons, at best the stain is Rudy's semen which could have been left on the pillow up to an hour prior to the murder up to when the duvet was cast over the body and the room door locked. Worst case is if someone in the prosecution delibrately tainted the stain so it would test positive for Raffaele's DNA.

The interesting question is why did the prosecution (and the civil attorney) jump up to block testing? The prosecution needs to cover for their earlier mistake of not testing the stain (or for their coverup if they did test it) by making excuses for why it should not have been tested. The civil party has one goal and that is extracting money from Raffaele and Amanda. The task of showing the suspect's involvement in the rape and murder of their client's daughter/sister becomes more difficult as more evidence points only to Rudy Guede. If the civil attorneys thought there was any chance that the stain would test positive for Raffaele they would have been demanding that it be tested.

If the DNA didn't match Rudi or Raf or Giacomo that would open up a new possibilities from someone else with Rudi (Koko or another ganf member) or that Mez had another boyfriend which would tarnish the saint meme and make more possible Rudi's crazy story.

The civil party having any standing in the case is absurd. That is another aspect that the PGP should agree with.

 

[Bill Williams]

In a way it is a clash of ideologies Vixen, but the real difference is the approach. This is a skeptics forum. You can expect to have your posts dissected and challenged even if we agree with most of your post. This happens to us all.

You can also expect to have misstatements of facts corrected. Few people anywhere are as knowledgeable about this case as the people posting here. Sources and citations are frequently requested of and by everyone. There probably is not a better place to learn the facts of this case than this site.

As a former member of Mensa ( former, because they discovered I was just not that smart) I look forward to reading your thoughts. I hope you are interested in learning and not just debating.

Right now, it seems as if you have your head filled with misinformation and that has colored your opnion. That's OK, I also at one time believed in their guilt. I had been a frequent visitor to TJMK, PMF.NET and .ORG. I read Vogt, Nadeau and various news articles. Unfortunately, many of these sources are filled with falsehoods, interlaced throughout. I soon discovered that much of the foundation that I based my opinion was wortnless.

Real intellects have the courage to change their minds.

Case in point....

Grinder and I are in essential agreement on all major points. Yet because this is a skeptics site, I have huge chunks of my ass missing from where he believes I went beyond what credible sources allow.

I can complain that he may be wrong in detail, but this is a skeptic's site! It's what prevents this site from becoming an echo chamber of innocence, unlike those other sites which spew hate, echo chamber-style.

 

[Antony]

As for Vixen hailing from the UK, didn't one post mention some obscure welsh sport like cheese rolling?

I believe cheese rolling is a Gloucestershire tradition, rather than Welsh.

At any rate, I'll bet dollars to donuts he is a he, (unless Bill agrees).

I don't think Vixen has taken any firm position, but rather seems to imply guilty sounding factoids,

The unsubstantiated hostility to Hellmann rather gives him/her away as a PGP.

But this is what I meant by the pattern of posting: the poster starts by affecting a position of neutrality, then puts out reasonable-sounding (to an uninformed reader) indications that the guilt argument is a strong one, then makes a show of taking offence at some display of impatience on the part of a PIP and announces a huffy departure, saying that JREF/ISF is populated by FOAK bullies.

A tradition maybe started by the scholarly Fiona, before my time even on the forum.

Similar in some degree, to dearly departed CoulsdonUK, except a half step bolder, or even a Platinov, minus the cryptic metaphors.

I think what most pro guilt posters don't get here, is that most here are hungry to find one decent argument or fact that could reasonably interpreted as indicating a possibility of guilt. And not out of a desire to believe guilt, but out of a desperate wish that our fellows who believe guilt are in some way recognizable as decent, honest, thoughtful and sane.

Many otherwise decent, honest, thoughtful and sane people can't quite sign up to the principle of presumption of innocence.

 

[moije2]

Where is the upside for the defense? Other than showing that the prosecution is nothing but a bunch of bafoons, at best the stain is Rudy's semen which could have been left on the pillow up to an hour prior to the murder up to when the duvet was cast over the body and the room door locked. Worst case is if someone in the prosecution delibrately tainted the stain so it would test positive for Raffaele's DNA.

The interesting question is why did the prosecution (and the civil attorney) jump up to block testing? The prosecution needs to cover for their earlier mistake of not testing the stain (or for their coverup if they did test it) by making excuses for why it should not have been tested. The civil party has one goal and that is extracting money from Raffaele and Amanda. The task of showing the suspect's involvement in the rape and murder of their client's daughter/sister becomes more difficult as more evidence points only to Rudy Guede. If the civil attorneys thought there was any chance that the stain would test positive for Raffaele they would have been demanding that it be tested.

I agree with your comments.

As for the question posed, there is a big reason for the defense to roll a little bit (not saying they did) regarding not testing the presumed semen stain:

1. The level of the mistrust must have been enormous. Remember the shoe print and the miraculous knife DNA. Too many happy mistakes.

2. Joined with the belief early in this debacle that the prosecution did not have an adequate case and that the first guilty verdict should never have happened.

 

[Dan O.]

It is possible to be independently minded without being a "guilter".

It is possible. I consider myself independant and will counter any argument if i don't think it is supported by the facts. But let's see where your thoughts really are...

I have deep knowledge because my interest is in why people commit this type of crime. Having taken criminology and psychopathology as a couple of my psychology options I became interested in getting to the bottom of this crime.

Why do you mean by "this type of crime" most of us here believe this is but a routine B&E petty theft type of crime where a resident returned home, surprised the burgler and ended up getting killed. This type of crime is unfortunately all too common.

If however you are reffering to the prosecutions theory that two new lovers that had only met the week before and with no history of violence teamed up with a third person that neither really knew to murder a roommate then there is no "this type of crime", there is only this crime (and as of March, there is officially not even this crime).

 

[Grinder]

I agree with your comments.

As for the question posed, there is a big reason for the defense to roll a little bit (not saying they did) regarding not testing the presumed semen stain:

Could you explain the roll remark?

1. The level of the mistrust must have been enormous. Remember the shoe print and the miraculous knife DNA. Too many happy mistakes.

They would have had their people there and would have assumed that if DNA had been planted the PLE would "tested".

Would an actual sample from Raf have more than just DNA. In order words would they have needed his semen to plant?

2. Joined with the belief early in this debacle that the prosecution did not have an adequate case and that the first guilty verdict should never have happened.

Since they did request it be tested I'd say that would refute the above.

 

[moije2]

With regard to this Mensa reference. I allow for the possibility that it was a harmless comment and not meant to persuade by credentials as it were.

I was curious about this mensa thing, a sort of fraternity/sorority for those that attach part of their identity to high scores on standardized tests. So I looked up the qualifications to see, as I roughly remembered, that one needs to have scored in the top 2% of a rcognized test blah blah. My curiosity revolves around the concept of membership. Once a member always a member? Is it sort of genetic of sorts qualification? Or do they have some requirement of CEUs in order to continue qualification?

On a further note, can a gross display of <lack of intelligence> be grounds for termination of qualification? Seems to me that a score achieved at age 16 or 17 or whatever might not be so relevant to IQ today.

These questions are really somewhat for humor as I think once in, you are in. But perhaps a person's membership should be challengable.

Certainly with regard to this case, and this board in particular, mensa does not carry weight. IMO.

 

[Dan O.]

If the DNA didn't match Rudi or Raf or Giacomo that would open up a new possibilities from someone else with Rudi (Koko or another ganf member) or that Mez had another boyfriend which would tarnish the saint meme and make more possible Rudi's crazy story.

The prosecution wouldn't care if the semen matched one or five unsubs. At worst they just have to get the cartoon edited to show the other perps. The only reason they would quash the semen result would be if it came back as a match for Guliano Mignini.

 

[carbonjam72]

If the DNA didn't match Rudi or Raf or Giacomo that would open up a new possibilities from someone else with Rudi (Koko or another ganf member) or that Mez had another boyfriend which would tarnish the saint meme and make more possible Rudi's crazy story.

The civil party having any standing in the case is absurd. That is another aspect that the PGP should agree with.

Yeah, if he were shooting gobs from the hallway. (One set of footprints in wet blood?).

 

[acbytesla]

Case in point....

Grinder and I are in essential agreement on all major points. Yet because this is a skeptics site, I have huge chunks of my ass missing from where he believes I went beyond what credible sources allow.

I can complain that he may be wrong in detail, but this is a skeptic's site! It's what prevents this site from becoming an echo chamber of innocence, unlike those other sites which spew hate, echo chamber-style.

Believe me, I know Grinder, We definitely have gone toe to toe about Rudy and the burglary at Ms. Diaz's apartment as well as the discussion about how motive and the personal histories of the suspects effects our views on the csse.

I personally welcome Vixen to the forum, but she can't expect us to be gentle and not criticize her posts. I for one have an issue with her characterization of Hellman, mostly because it was vague and not supported with specifics. I expect any poster to explain their rationale for their stated opinion and to support it with evidene. Othrrwise, we might has well be discussing our favorite colors.

 

[Strozzi]

Blimey why would we bloody well do that?

Of course, as always you have struck to heart of the matter. Along with Curatolo the PGP refusing to acknowledge the unacceptability of her work and the rest of the ICSI crew s the mind. The "well if the DNA isn't good for Amanda and Raffaele why is good for Rudi" is beyond mindless not withstanding (you Limeys use that word) the DNA isn't needed for his conviction. I completely nonplussed by their inability to see these faults.

Perhaps V can shed light on how PGP can watch the technician photographer drag the swab on the sink and then claim AK's DNA is mixed with Mez'

I have a another question for Vixen. Why would Mez wear a bra with rusted hooks?

Choose one:
1) Mez didn't know her bra had rusty hooks. It might be due to the salt content in the air blowing landward from the North Sea.
2) Dr. Stefanoni collected the bra clasp 46 days after the crime. She tested the hooks to try to find DNA on them. She found the DNA of at least four males on them - one of which had a profile that fit half the men in southern Italy including possibly males of the Sollecito family. She then stored the bra clasp in a fluid-filled glass tube which rendered the hooks rusty and prevented the clasp hooks from being examined a second time by scientists.
2) I didn't know they were rusty. I'm new to the case.

 

[moije2]

Could you explain the roll remark?



They would have had their people there and would have assumed that if DNA had been planted the PLE would "tested".

Would an actual sample from Raf have more than just DNA. In order words would they have needed his semen to plant?



Since they did request it be tested I'd say that would refute the above.

As always you may great comments. I understood from comments that indeed they did requeest it be tested. But I thought Vixen above question why they did not as if it were an implication of guilt. This becomes irrelevant if testing was requested, but the logic Vixen's question was what I was addressing.

As far the issue of malfeasance with the sample, you would think semen, and not just DNA would be needed. But I don't underestimate their level of paranoia.

I have always mightily respected this boards contributors. Wish I could be at half your level of detailed knowledge. Keep in mind that my posts are usually tapped out on my phone while at work.

With that said, tear 'em apart!

 

[carbonjam72]

Columbo & the Mensa case...

With regard to this Mensa reference. I allow for the possibility that it was a harmless comment and not meant to persuade by credentials as it were.

I was curious about this mensa thing, a sort of fraternity/sorority for those that attach part of their identity to high scores on standardized tests. So I looked up the qualifications to see, as I roughly remembered, that one needs to have scored in the top 2% of a rcognized test blah blah. My curiosity revolves around the concept of membership. Once a member always a member? Is it sort of genetic of sorts qualification? Or do they have some requirement of CEUs in order to continue qualification?

On a further note, can a gross display of <lack of intelligence> be grounds for termination of qualification? Seems to me that a score achieved at age 16 or 17 or whatever might not be so relevant to IQ today.

These questions are really somewhat for humor as I think once in, you are in. But perhaps a person's membership should be challengable.

Certainly with regard to this case, and this board in particular, mensa does not carry weight. IMO.

There was an episode on 'Columbo', where he investigates a murder at a Mensa club. He gets the Mensa member to admit the crime by flattering the brilliance of it and asking how it was done, or something like that.

Suggesting, there are different kinds of intelligence. Wisdom and being geek rock star do not necessarily go hand in hand.

Of course, that's just TV from the 1970s. But so was Mignini's theory in this case - grade "D" slasher/gore for grindhouse theaters on 42nd street.

 

[anglolawyer]

There was an episode on 'Columbo', where he investigates a murder at a Mensa club. He gets the Mensa member to admit the crime by flattering the brilliance of it and asking how it was done, or something like that.

Suggesting, there are different kinds of intelligence. Wisdom and being geek rock star do not necessarily go hand in hand.

Of course, that's just TV from the 1970s. But so was Mignini's theory in this case - grade "D" slasher/gore for grindhouse theaters on 42nd street.

I think I remember that one. The murder involved something with the arm of a record player dislodging a heavy book which made a loud thump and a gun firing by itself. If memory serves, Columbo vexed the killer by getting the solution slightly wrong provoking an incriminating, exasperated correction. We can try that out on Vixen when s/he actually says something interesting. I fancy we may be in for a wait though as s/he seems to have gone away for a bit.

 

[Bill Williams]

I think I remember that one. The murder involved something with the arm of a record player dislodging a heavy book which made a loud thump and a gun firing by itself. If memory serves, Columbo vexed the killer by getting the solution slightly wrong provoking an incriminating, exasperated correction. We can try that out on Vixen when s/he actually says something interesting. I fancy we may be in for a wait though as s/he seems to have gone away for a bit.

Rats. What with the cased now really closed, there is little, really, to talk about.

Vixen seemed bent on discrediting Hellmann - probably because the ISC in March 2015 decided that Helmmann was right after all. What was worth talking about was not Vixen's opinion about that, it was worth it to discuss the reasons behind why he thought that.

He thought that Hellmann had brought Contin & Vecchiotti into the case as a "limited exercise". That was simply bizarre to claim. He thought that Hellmann was out of his depth as a judge adjudicating a criminal trial. That, too, was bizarre.... a long since debunked guilter claim not seen, really, since 2012. (It, though, is not meant as a comment against Hellmann in 2015; it serves to set-up some as-yet-unknown reason why Section 5 of the ISC, Mascara and Bruno, are somehow deficient....)

It does serve as a reminder of what the guilter project was..... "was" (past tense) because there is little reason to pay heed to it these days. It was to throw muck at anyone espousing innocence as randomly as possible hoping something would stick.

Marasca/Bruno proved that ultimately nothing did.

So what are we going to talk about from now until the M/B report arrives?

 

[davefoc]

I have a another question for Vixen. Why would Mez wear a bra with rusted hooks?

Choose one:
...
2) Dr. Stefanoni collected the bra clasp 46 days after the crime. She tested the hooks to try to find DNA on them. She found the DNA of at least four males on them - one of which had a profile that fit half the men in southern Italy including possibly males of the Sollecito family. She then stored the bra clasp in a fluid-filled glass tube which rendered the hooks rusty and prevented the clasp hooks from being examined a second time by scientists.
...

Your second option is the most likely by a lot but I think it overstates the case against the DNA sample on the bra hook.

The most likely explanation for the detection of Sollecito DNA on the hook was that in some way biological material from Sollecito was actually on the bra hook. Sollecito's DNA was detected at a significantly lower concentration than Kercher's but it was significantly higher than the DNA detected from the 2 or 3 other male donors.

It may be the strongest piece of evidence against Sollecito and it can not be determined how it got there. Of course, because the testing was done by the same person that produced the bogus DNA results from the knife the test result is suspect. And the fact that the test couldn't be redone because of actions taken by Stefanoni reduces its credibility as a piece of evidence even further.

And the fact that there isn't a plausble scenario whereby Sollecito could have been in the room when Kercher was murdered where he left absolutely no other trace of himself strongly suggests however the Sollecito DNA ended up on the bra hook it wasn't during Kercher's murder.

My only point here is that it appears to be unknowable how Sollecito DNA came to be on the bra hook. There are many possible ways that the DNA could have come to be on the hook that don't include Sollecito participating in the murder of Kercher. But that particular piece of evidence can not be discounted completely when it is examined by itself. This is different than the rest of the evidence against AK and RS which seems to be falsifiable in isolation because of implausible details associated with that evidence.