Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Planigale]

No evidence of Raf and Amanda in the murder room? Together with the shard of glass from the staged burglary room, is the bra clasp with Raf's indisputable DNA thereon - the First Instance court rejected contamination claims - and then there is the shoeprint testimony re exhibit photo 105:

"the technicians reported that it was made by the deposit of haematic substance (i.e., blood); the outer edge of the shoe is distinctly visible; nine lightly arced elements are discernable, with a width of ...[various measurements]...corresponding to the ball of the foot. The technicians hypothesised that the print had been made by the heel and the central part of the sole of a left shoe. Based on the small size of the heel and the reduced dimensions [overall], it was held to be a woman's shoe print [Massei's emphasis), of a size between 36 and 38. In any case, it is a shoe much smaller than that attributed to Rudy Hermann Guede."

So you see, there is solid scientific evidence for all three of the defendants in the murder room.

Who do you prefer to believe, the p!sspoor American media who mindlessly claim, "there is no evidence" or employees of the Italian police forensics team?

The expert witness of the above is Dr Lorenzo Rinaldi (Engineer, Principal Technical Director of the State Police, Director of the three sections composed of the Identity Division of the ERT).

Who's next to argue that Rinaldi "is as crooked, bent and corrupt as Stefanoni, Mignini, Maresca, and Italy"? Anyone?

This provides no evidence about Sollecito's presence in the 'murder room'. it does not even provide certain evidence that Sollecito touched the bra. Scientific studies previously quoted (e.g. Goray, M. and R. A. H. van Oorschot (2014). "The complexities of DNA transfer during a social setting." Legal Medicine 17(2): 82-91.) show the DNA could be due to secondary or tertiary transfer. Even accepting the case for primary transfer it says nothing about where or when the contact with the transfer occurred.

As for the 'small' footprint, again examine the evidence, look at the defence and prosecution presentation.
http://www.amandaknox.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Trascrizioni-2009-Sep-18-Paggi-Vinci.pdf
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/failed-sexual-assault-investigation/
There is certainly a reasonable case that no smaller footprint was present even if there was this is far from providing evidence of identity. Size of foot indicates size of person not gender. Certainly no matching shoe of Knox to the print with identifying individual wear marks were found.

Look at where the facts lead rather than trying to fit the facts to an opinion.

 

[Kauffer]

One of the women police officers in the room early in the interrogation of Raffaele on the night of Nov 5 told Raffaele "You don't know what that cow has done!". That was as she was insuniating to Raffaele that Amanda was involved in the murder.

This was separate to any discussion of any underwear Amanda purchased on Nov 3 when she was not able to access her own clothes from her room and needed to buy replacement clothes.

Not that we need to spend too much time on this but Raffaele on p 42 of HB, reports "... a laughably childish thong with a cow motif". Amanda, on the other hand reports on p 94 of WTBH "cotton bikini briefs" in red, with no mention of a motif, hippo, cow or otherwise.

I'm wondering whether this discrepancy has a bearing on the case

 

[Grinder]

Size of foot indicates size of person not gender. Certainly no matching shoe of Knox to the print with identifying individual wear marks were found.

Look at where the facts lead rather than trying to fit the facts to an opinion.

No matching shoe was found, period. Whether owned by Knox or not.

 

[Grinder]

Not that we need to spend too much time on this but Raffaele on p 42 of HB, reports "... a laughably childish thong with a cow motif". Amanda, on the other hand reports on p 94 of WTBH "cotton bikini briefs" in red, with no mention of a motif, hippo, cow or otherwise.

I'm wondering whether this discrepancy has a bearing on the case

Clearly someone is lying. Just more of their lies. Circumstantial evidence of guilt.

 

[Planigale]

This shard of glass shows that someone was in the murder room after being in the room with the broken window. Since the prosecution's contention is that the break-in was allegedly "staged" as the last act before leaving the scene, how does this become evidence against the 2 students?


... and the Hellmann court upheld them, supported by the Conti-Vecchiotti report which remains valid evidence. Why do you continue to appeal to the Massei and Nencini conclusions? All court decisions have been annulled, and those supporting your POV now have the same status as Hellmann.

In any case, have you actually viewed the video of the bra clasp collection by investigators? It's here, on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMaTI0SiuLw

If anything is "staged", then this is it. Judging by their antics, the team clearly know in advance what significance will be attached to this item. What's all this shining a flashlight on it and peering at it? Can they see DNA with their own eyes? Why do they put it back on the floor to photograph it, when it has already been moved from its original location?

Finally, they are handling it, right there, on video with dirty gloves. Contamination event, right there on camera. This is enough to make it completely worthless as evidence.


Firstly, an unidentified woman's shoeprint is not evidence against Amanda, specifically. Secondly, the Massei conclusions have been annulled. We will see whether the ISC considers the partial shoeprint of Guede's to be indicative of Amanda.


You only have to look at the bra clasp video referenced above. When the Italian police forensics team use methods that are manifestly improper, then yes, I will believe real forensic experts who point out that there is no genuine evidence.


So, not impartial then.


I have seen Rinaldi's blatant pseudo-science, trying to pin the bath-mat print to Raffaele. If that isn't corrupt, then I don't know what is.

This is worth emphasising the measurements made are too good to be true. There is no way these can be real measurements of the bathmat footprint made blind to the suspects measurements. These are fitted to match those of Sollecito. Even his measurements have the length of the ball of the foot differing from Sollecito thus excluding him. His claim of identity is patently false.

 

[Dan O.]

 

[Planigale]

No matching shoe was found, period. Whether owned by Knox or not.

This is a good point. Guede admits to having had a pair of shoes that would match. He had a shoe box to match in his room. I am unclear whether he admits to wearing them when he was present at the murder, but these and his clothing worn at that time were disposed of by Guede and never recovered. He seems never to have said to the police where they were disposed of, I suspect because the knife might be co-located.

 

[Grinder]

This is a good point. Guede admits to having had a pair of shoes that would match. He had a shoe box to match in his room. I am unclear whether he admits to wearing them when he was present at the murder, but these and his clothing worn at that time were disposed of by Guede and never recovered. He seems never to have said to the police where they were disposed of, I suspect because the knife might be co-located.

Pretty sure he told them he tossed them into a dumpster in Germany. I'll look for a cite.

 

[kwill]

I never take this stuff very seriously. It's amazing what people say behind other people's backs. Very often, they don't really mean what they say, It's more about blowing off steam or even just having something. People talk about their bosses, employees, roommates, boyfriends, girlfriends, husbands, wives lovers, etc. etc. etc.

You can't take it seriously. My sisters do it constantly. The vast majority they don't really mean.

Amanda was different. She was a Yank, enough different that a bunch of Brits would talk about their strange colonial cousin. She's also from Seattle, which has its own separate culture that is kind of unique. I'm sure that Meredith is likely to comment about her. That doesn't really mean that she didn't like Amanda. I think it is very telling that so many of Mez's texts to Amanda signed off with kisses.If she truly hated Amanda there is no way that she would have done that.

I'm from Seattle, too. And I wasn't suggesting that anything Meredith said to the English women was evidence that she really disliked Amanda . . . just commenting on a couple of points related to that.

One is that these comments are often used to show that there was "tension" between Amanda and Meredith as a way to establish some kind of half-baked motive for Amanda to commit murder. That makes no sense, though, because there's no evidence that Amanda ever talked smack about Meredith.

The other is that it would be a generous, honest thing if one of those English women gave the matter some thought and then tried to undo a little of the harm that came from giving this gossip to the press. I understand that they weren't responsible for what the police or the prosecutors did with their statements, but they are responsible for quotes they gave to reporters themselves.

Like: I was wrong. At the time I thought that there was some sort of evidence that Amanda Knox was responsible for the murder, and I said things about her in public that were thoughtless and cruel. I'm sure it caused needless suffering and I regret that.

A fantasy, I know. I like to think people are capable of self-assessment and willing to hold themselves accountable.

 

[acbytesla]

I'm from Seattle, too. And I wasn't suggesting that anything Meredith said to the English women was evidence that she really disliked Amanda . . . just commenting on a couple of points related to that.

One is that these comments are often used to show that there was "tension" between Amanda and Meredith as a way to establish some kind of half-baked motive for Amanda to commit murder. That makes no sense, though, because there's no evidence that Amanda ever talked smack about Meredith.

The other is that it would be a generous, honest thing if one of those English women gave the matter some thought and then tried to undo a little of the harm that came from giving this gossip to the press. I understand that they weren't responsible for what the police or the prosecutors did with their statements, but they are responsible for quotes they gave to reporters themselves.

Like: I was wrong. At the time I thought that there was some sort of evidence that Amanda Knox was responsible for the murder, and I said things about her in public that were thoughtless and cruel. I'm sure it caused needless suffering and I regret that.

A fantasy, I know. I like to think people are capable of self-assessment and willing to hold themselves accountable.

Some are...but I do think they might be the exception. Just take a look at Vixen's comments. She isn't the slightest bit interested in evaluating the evidence and the arguments for innocence despite her disingenuous claims. People become invested in what they think they know. Their opinions become hardened into stone.

Also these British girls have had their beliefs immortalized by the media. That makes it 100 times harder for them. I'm reminded of the Fonz on Happy Days and how he just couldn't say he was wrong. When he tried he would go "I was wrrrrr" never enunciating the entire word. In Dale Carnegie's book "How to win friends and influence people" Carnegie writes that about the worst thing you can say to someone is that they are wrong.

If ever there was a case that proves this maxim, this would be it. There IS NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE AT ALL that comes even remotely close to proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Amanda andon't Raffaele had anything to do with Meredith's murder and Italy spent millions of dollars and 7 and a half years trying to avoid admitting they were wrong.

 

[Bill Williams]

No evidence of Raf and Amanda in the murder room? Together with the shard of glass from the staged burglary room, is the bra clasp with Raf's indisputable DNA thereon - the First Instance court rejected contamination claims - and then there is the shoeprint testimony re exhibit photo 105:

This provides no evidence about Sollecito's presence in the 'murder room'. it does not even provide certain evidence that Sollecito touched the bra. Scientific studies previously quoted (e.g. Goray, M. and R. A. H. van Oorschot (2014). "The complexities of DNA transfer during a social setting." Legal Medicine 17(2): 82-91.) show the DNA could be due to secondary or tertiary transfer. Even accepting the case for primary transfer it says nothing about where or when the contact with the transfer occurred.

As for the 'small' footprint, again examine the evidence, look at the defence and prosecution presentation.
http://www.amandaknox.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Trascrizioni-2009-Sep-18-Paggi-Vinci.pdf
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/failed-sexual-assault-investigation/
There is certainly a reasonable case that no smaller footprint was present even if there was this is far from providing evidence of identity. Size of foot indicates size of person not gender. Certainly no matching shoe of Knox to the print with identifying individual wear marks were found.

Look at where the facts lead rather than trying to fit the facts to an opinion.

The now annulled Nencini motivations report virtually proves one thing: that to convict Raffaele Sollecito of this crime, one must take a consistent suspect-centric investigation view of this.

Simply put it is this: suspect's DNA found/suspect guilty.

Nencini makes this point even better than Vixen, for Nencini the point isn't that other alleles are found as part of sample 165B, for him it is solely the point that Raffaele's profile is the most identifiable part of it.

Nencini discounts with the wave of a hand the other three male contributors to 165B, saying that contamination is not the point - the point, using Nencini's now discredited reasoning, is that Raffaele is found.

This is the very definition of suspect-centric findings, and Vixen is carrying on the tradition, one that leads to wrongful convictions; as per Nencini's decision.

 

[Kauffer]

The now annulled Nencini motivations report virtually proves one thing: that to convict Raffaele Sollecito of this crime, one must take a consistent suspect-centric investigation view of this.

Simply put it is this: suspect's DNA found/suspect guilty.

Nencini makes this point even better than Vixen, for Nencini the point isn't that other alleles are found as part of sample 165B, for him it is solely the point that Raffaele's profile is the most identifiable part of it.

Nencini discounts with the wave of a hand the other three male contributors to 165B, saying that contamination is not the point - the point, using Nencini's now discredited reasoning, is that Raffaele is found.

This is the very definition of suspect-centric findings, and Vixen is carrying on the tradition, one that leads to wrongful convictions; as per Nencini's decision.

Yes, this was the most astonishing reasoning. But the larger issue that this and other arguments he makes serves to disguise is the relationship between the professional judge's report and the lay jurors' deliberations.

If you recall, the "rogue" lay judge on the panel, Genny Ballerini, apparently stated in interview that the professional judges did not try to influence her and her colleagues' decision. At the end of the process of deliberation, so we are led to believe, the lay judges rendered their verdict and Nencini and his deputy subsequently wrote the motivation report.

According to reports, "she insisted that the two professional judges on the panel had not tried to sway the jury."

Assuming this is true, then the motivation report cannot be the product of the lay juror's deliberations with regard to the inclusion of content, type and style of argument unless Nencini recorded and had transcribed the detailed deliberations of the lay judges and his report is simply a precis of the transcription. I hardly think so. So, therefore, Nencini has written what he thinks having been told what the lay judges' decision is.

This is interesting for another reason, which again presupposes what the rogue juror has said is true. If the lay judges had returned not guilty verdicts, then Nencini would have been required to write a wholly different report, pointing out, for example, the reason why Raffaele's DNA on the clasp as part of a mixed profile cannot be regarded as evidence for his participation in the murder!

On the other hand, the story of the process given by the rogue juror could be inaccurate and not only is the motivation report the work of Nencini, but so are the verdicts, with the jurors "guided" towards them or else ignored. Ballerini was also reported as saying after "she heard the verdict and sentence": "I said immediately that I did not agree and they took note. Other members of the jury were also against an increase in the sentence....but they were told there was no alternative.'"

Perhaps it is most likely, after all, that the lay judges are more window dressing than anything else at Italian trials.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-s-involvement-Meredith-Kercher-s-murder.html

 

[Dan O.]

Grinder and anyone else that still think the bra clasp might have been cut, look at Bill's photo at the top of page 2 and the enlargement I posted at the bottom of page 2, here you can see very clearly the top edge on this clasp part which is the edge that was sewn to the back band. This edge is no cut. In fact, the fabric is folded over on this edge. There was no cutting of the band.


ETA: Here is the edge of the back band that was attached to the clasp showing the straight factory cut and the line where the stitches came out.

 

[Grinder]

Grinder and anyone else that still think the bra clasp might have been cut,

I don't think that's exactly what I said and if so it's not what I meant to say. My point was that I really think it is a distinction without a difference. Either one or someone else could have torn it or cut it. I don't see why the PGP think cutting, even if it were the case, points at Raf except they have a fetish about him and knives.

To be clear, I think it was torn.

 

[Numbers]

Grinder and anyone else that still think the bra clasp might have been cut, look at Bill's photo at the top of page 2 and the enlargement I posted at the bottom of page 2, here you can see very clearly the top edge on this clasp part which is the edge that was sewn to the back band. This edge is no cut. In fact, the fabric is folded over on this edge. There was no cutting of the band.

One thought about the clear and convincing evidence that the seam was ripped apart is that considerable force would be required to accomplish this separation (unless the thread or fabric was frayed or worn from, for example, very many washings). The failure (ripping) of the seam suggests that Guede was lifting and/or pulling Meredith by her bra (shoulder) strap.

There are test standards (for example, from the ASTM) for the strength of seams in fabrics. A video of a tensile test to failure on a sewn non-woven fabric seam is shown at this materials test machine site:

http://info.admet.com/videos/bid/26442/Sewn-Seam-Strength-Test

The results obtained for the sample in the video cannot be directly related to the bra seam failure because of the many probable differences in materials, thread and stitching, and loading, but may give some qualitative impression of the force required.

One could also gain a qualitative impression by attempting to rip apart a fabric seam by hand.

 

[Dan O.]

One thought about the clear and convincing evidence that the seam was ripped apart is that considerable force would be required to accomplish this separation (unless the thread or fabric was frayed or worn from, for example, very many washings). The failure (ripping) of the seam suggests that Guede was lifting and/or pulling Meredith by her bra (shoulder) strap.

There are test standards (for example, from the ASTM) for the strength of seams in fabrics. A video of a tensile test to failure on a sewn non-woven fabric seam is shown at this materials test machine site:

http://info.admet.com/videos/bid/26442/Sewn-Seam-Strength-Test

The results obtained for the sample in the video cannot be directly related to the bra seam failure because of the many probable differences in materials, thread and stitching, and loading, but may give some qualitative impression of the force required.

One could also gain a qualitative impression by attempting to rip apart a fabric seam by hand.

An examination of the clasp reveals that not only had the seam failed but the metal hook was on the verge of failure. Here is a video showing bra hook stress testing that provides some usefull numbers:



This one shows a weight of 40 lbs for an industrial strength bra. Other resources indicat that 25 lbs is typical for a bra hook.

Because the bra wraps around, a lifting force of 50 lbs. is needed to break the hook. Meredith's upper body weight would be plenty to act as the counter force.

 

[Grinder]

In a recent post a leader at .net suggest that this ISC ruling is corrupt and uses the Pecorelli case as a comparison. The wiki is here.

 

[Vixen]

STUPID NONSENSE. Nobody is blaming Rudy because he's black. And it is absurd and disingenuous to suggest it...unless you're really suggesting that Rudy didn't kill Meredith. Is that what you're saying Vixen?

What does Rudy's race have to do with the fact that there isn't one or two ambiguous disputable shoe prints of his in Meredith's blood found in the cottage but a dozen undisputed shoe print? Or there are actual voice recordings of him not even in custody admitting that he was there that night and even saying that Amanda WASN'T THERE.

These arguments disgust me. They are deliberately obfuscating the facts. There is nothing intelligent about them. Certainly nothing worthy of a self-proclaimed Mensa member.

Of course, Rudy is scum, but as the forensic police have identified at least three perps, why is it imperative for Rudy to shoulder the blame for all of them, as per US media opinion?

 

[Vixen]

So much for yout claimed neutrality. TOTAL NONSENSE and absolutely ZERO EVIDENCE to support such a nutty claim. And yes, the stain could be long to other persons at the scene, so why didn't they test it? NOTE** The defense requested that the stain be tested and it was the prosecution that fought it. I wonder why?

In his book Honour Bound, Raf himself confirms the defense did not want it tested in case forensics said it was him.

 

[Vixen]

If anyone has doubt about Massei's abilities they should read Curatolo's interview and compare it with Massei's account. Whereas C said he stayed until just before midnight Massei moved the time earlier to work with the disco buses, only they weren't running that night.

Only one expert said it couldn't be just one attacker yet Massei makes that a judicial truth.

Massei and his peers preferred the opinion it was more than one having reviewed all the evidence in front of them.

I dare say, Curatolo didn't have a watch, hence the time adjustment based on circumstantial events.