Continuation Part 14: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

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


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.


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

Not really unsubstantiated, Antony, as the highest judges in the land tore Hellmann to bits. It's no good having the right vetdict if your reasoning does not work.

 

[Vixen]

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.

How would they be able to fake the test, if the defense was there to witness it?

 

[RoseMontague]

Personally, I always prefer to think it is "cock up" rather than "conspiracy". Generally, officials don't deliberately set out to wrong other people. Sometimes, it just feels that way.

This was deliberate.

 

[RoseMontague]

How would they be able to fake the test, if the defense was there to witness it?

Raffaele's expert was there for the knife tests. His report calls Stefi's results worthless and of no scientific value. For the shoe print, one of Raffaele's family members pointed out the error the cop's "expert" had made.

 

[Dan O.]

...
Its scary that you know this Columbo episode. IIRC, you have nailed it exactly right.

You call that knailing it? He referenced two items and only one was correct. The real gun with a silencer was used for the real murder. The gun was hidden in the fireplace flue Then a custom phonograph that automatically indexes a selected track was started as a timing device. After the murderer had gone downstairs to establish an alibi, the track ended causing the tone arm to reset and as it swings back it first makes electrical contact with a clip connected to wires running under the carpet to a squib in an umbrella causing the simulated gunshot. The tone arm then knocks a felt marker off onto a dictionary which is precarisly balanced causing the dictionary to fall to the floor creating the thump simulating a body fall. As the other household guests rush upstairs and swing open the door to the murder room the air pressure cause the door on the other side of the room to slam shut simulating the murderer making his escape.

 

[Vixen]

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.

Once you're in, you're in, as long as you pay your subs. It is true, it is meaningless in that it is a part of your makeup in the same way you might have green eyes, or be naturally good at singing. People join to meet others on the same wavelength, not because they are conceited. I don't consider myself superior. I had to work just as hard for my professional qualifications as anybody else.

 

[Vixen]

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.

Bras are designed to withstand numerous washings. Probably human error, not to consider the metal bits might go rusty.

 

[Strozzi]

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.

acbytesla, you were expelled from Mensa? I thought for sure you'd float.

Let me guess what led to that. Mensa found out you studied three years at an Italian university, earned a Laurea, and insist everyone call you Dottore? Or you got an MA in Italy and call yourself a Ph.D.?

 

[Vixen]

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.

There was a really funny Simpsons episode when Lisa Simpson joined. Most mensans aren't particulary bright.

 

[Strozzi]

Bras are designed to withstand numerous washings. Probably human error, not to consider the metal bits might go rusty.

Vixen, you must be female. No ragazzo would give such a practical answer.

 

[acbytesla]

True, there is a lot of misinformation, particularly in books and the press. Much of it is one dullard repeating another dullard's wrong facts because they are too lazy to do any research of their own. Plus the use of cliches and wellworn platitudes is very annoying.

I am actually a high-functioning idiot, who managed to infiltrate Mensa. It's only a social club.

I have formulated a good idea of what happened, based on my own perceptions.

I agree with you about the media entirely. You say you have a good idea what happened based on your own perceptions. I'm curious, what do you believe happened and what information are you basing that idea?

 

[Vixen]

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.

There was surprisingly limited DNA of Guede, when you consider the sheer quantity of blood found. Sam Mandez got life without parole on the basis of one fingerprint matched after FOUR years.

Where do you draw the line as to permissable evidence?

 

[acbytesla]

acbytesla, you were expelled from Mensa? I thought for sure you'd float.

Let me guess what led to that. Mensa found out you studied three years at an Italian university, earned a Laurea, and insist everyone call you Dottore? Or you got an MA in Italy and call yourself a Ph.D.?

That was a joke about being expelled.

 

[RoseMontague]

There was surprisingly limited DNA of Guede, when you consider the sheer quantity of blood found. Sam Mandez got life without parole on the basis of one fingerprint matched after FOUR years.

Where do you draw the line as to permissable evidence?

Guede admitted being there. His date with Meredith excuse did not fly with the court.

 

[Kaosium]

Bras are designed to withstand numerous washings. Probably human error, not to consider the metal bits might go rusty.

That would be more believable had Stefanoni not told the Massei Court this:

Dr Stefanoni indicated an incorrect storage of the specimen in an environment which was not ideal, such as in warmth, or enclosed in a plastic bag where water might be present and, not being able to evaporate, it facilitates the proliferation of micro-organisms. She stressed that the consequence of a conservation carried out in an incorrect way was the deterioration of the specimen so that, when analysing it, very probably ‚no genetic result would be able to be obtained‛.

When the independent experts went to re-test the bra-clasp they found:

The item to be examined was observed by us to be locked inside a transparent tube with a red top, contained in turn in small sealed bag [bustina sigillata], of transparent plastic, of the State Police.

Huh.

Go figure.

 

[Vixen]

It is exactly as Grinder explained upthread. So much so that Judge Massei went at length as to why it simply would not have been helpful to test it.

I'll have to revisit that bit.

 

[RoseMontague]

Huh.

Go figure.

She also told the court that the TMB test on the knife was negative and that meant without a doubt it was not blood. Different story with the footprints revealed by Luminol. She's just a mass of contradictions.

 

[Vixen]

There is no paranoia here unless you are

It is a game to figure out who people are. You have shown up 7 years after the start when a final verdict has come down discussing how the defense should have acted in the trial of the first instance using arguments that the PGP have used for years that didnt really make sense then and really make no sense now.

If you think there is doubt please put together a time line that would work for the kids being guilty.

For the umpty-ninth time, I have not taken part in a forum before regarding this case.

 

[Vixen]

The question is: why didn't the prosecution test it, and when it was discovered by the defense why did they (and Maresca) protest it being tested throughout the rest of the trial(s)?

The answer is (most likely) that they did test it. After all it was a visible stain found on a pillowcase underneath the hips of a mostly nude murder victim who had the DNA of an attacker insider her. One cannot pretend they didn't look closely at that pillowcase, after all they tried to advance one of Rudy's partial prints as evidence of a 'size 37 woman's shoe' (or however they put it) thus they must have examined it thoroughly.

However like the TMB (a blood test) negatives on the luminol hits but omitted from the (supposedly) comprehensive forensic report, the RTIGF, they probably just decided to omit the results of the test on the putative semen stain as well because it 'didn't help their case.' Regarding those TMB negatives we even know they (Stefanoni) lied in court about doing them and would not have been caught had they not been ordered to release a bunch of documents on July 30, 2009 when the trial was mostly over (all of August is a vacation for the Italian Court System).

There's over a hundred samples that returned results indicating about as much or more DNA than (what they claimed was on) the knife blade, but those results were also withheld and the prosecution and Stefanoni fought tooth and nail to ensure the court or public never saw them.

That semen stain would have been tested by the Massei court had the prosecution and/or Maresca insisted, but they took the opposite tack and fought against it instead. Why do you suppose that was? Why did the prosecution and Maresca jump up and protest when the independent experts asked if they could open up the kitchen knife and test areas in the cracks where blood couldn't have been washed up? Normally you'd expect the defense to protest the possibility of new evidence being developed during the trial, but in these instances the defense either asked for it to be tested (semen stain) or didn't protest (opening kitchen knife).

The most parsimonious answer is because the prosecution already knew what those results would be and that they 'wouldn't help their case.'

I agree with you.

 

[Kaosium]

There was surprisingly limited DNA of Guede, when you consider the sheer quantity of blood found. Sam Mandez got life without parole on the basis of one fingerprint matched after FOUR years.

Where do you draw the line as to permissable evidence?

Cite please?