Continuation Part 15: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Sergei Walankov]

Is it in fact the done thing for one section of the ISC to repudiate the finding of another?

 

[Dan O.]

Well, you have to admit that TJMK has 100s of lawyers. Ninety-nine if you delete Machiavelli who is nowhere to be seen. Ninety-seven if you discount those now trapped behind Peggy's Iron Curtain.

Me, I'm a fan of authority. I'd have never even remotely understood the issues around DNA in this case if Chris_Halikides had not gently taken me by the hand, and patiently re-explained what to him is obvious, and what is to us pugknockers is the mysteries of Delphi.

Chris does not present himself as an "it's true because I say it's true" authority. Chris is a source of knowledge. He can tell you what the facts are and provide references to back up what he says. and being a professor, he is quite adept at finding explanations that penetrate the thick skulls of pugknockers in a hormonally induced trance. In comparison, your case was easy.

 

[acbytesla]

I guess the footprint-on-postcard point is part of the mass of 'all the other evidence' that convinces the feeble-minded. It's remarkable how much of it Mignini neglected to use (not this footprint, not the moving the body theory, not the lamp). TJMK and the guilter-wiki are full of crap and Vixen is doing the right thing by seeking enlightenment here.

But in truth Anglo, Vixen is NOT seeking enlightenment, but trolling and engaging in mental masturbation. And like all forms of masturbation, it may be enjoyable to a degree but is never truly fulfilling.

 

[Bill Williams]

Chris does not present himself as an "it's true because I say it's true" authority. Chris is a source of knowledge. He can tell you what the facts are and provide references to back up what he says. and being a professor, he is quite used to finding explanations that penetrate the thick skulls of pugknockers in a hormonally induced trance. In comparison, your case was easy.

Ouch!!

But then again, Dan O., you just described the only kind of authority worth listening to.

 

[Bill Williams]

Is it in fact the done thing for one section of the ISC to repudiate the finding of another?

It must be true, at least in theory. I believe the Wikipedia article on Italy's court of Cassation says that any one of its panels meeting at for a separate matter is not bound by precedent, if that's what you mean.

 

[Dan O.]

Could be Strozzi. My point really is that while I have a theory as to how the murder took place, I have scant reason to feel any confidence that the murder happened like this. I think the evidence tells us who...but only a little about how. It is there where we start playing fill in the blanks.

I din't think it was Strozzi

The evidence tells us not so much what happened but what didn't happen. A narative is nothing but an educated guess as to what took place. But when you filter out the naratives that are excluded by the evidence and select the simplest from what remains as per Occam, you get a representative explanation of the event.

 

[Kauffer]

I din't think it was Strozzi

The evidence tells us not so much what happened but what didn't happen. A narative is nothing but an educated guess as to what took place. But when you filter out the naratives that are excluded by the evidence and select the simplest from what remains as per Occam, you get a representative explanation of the event.

An acquittal is based on the principle of reasonable doubt. One arrives at a notion of proof beyond a reasonable doubt by eliminating all possible reasonably minded narratives consistent with an innocent explanation of the evidence adduced against a defendant. This is the burden of proof and it lies with the prosecution. The prosecution must demonstrate that the only reasonably constructed narrative is one which supports a guilty verdict.

"The condition required by this law to arrive at a verdict of guilty does not, therefore, allow one to formulate a belief in terms of probability: that is, to issue a guilty verdict, it is not sufficient for the probability of the prosecution hypothesis to be greater than that of the defense hypothesis, even when the former is significantly larger [notevolmente più numerose]; but [rather] it is necessary that every explanation other than the prosecution hypothesis not be plausible at all, according to a criterion of reasonability. In any other case, acquittal of the defendant is required."

The astonishing story of this case is that not only is the prosecution unable to present a case which eliminates alternative reasonable minded narratives, it is actually unable to construct one in support of itself.

"Now, however, the “bricks” of this edifice [costruzione] have themselves collapsed; that is, this is not a question merely of a differing arrangement [una diversa ricollocazione] of these bricks, so as not to permit the realization of the planned architectural project, but rather of a lack of material necessary for the construction [in the first place]. And the collapse of the material elements of the prosecution case [il progetto accusatorio] obviously does not permit us to arrive at a verdict [pronuncia] of guilt beyond all reasonable doubt."

Excerpts from Hellmann report

 

[acbytesla]

I din't think it was Strozzi

The evidence tells us not so much what happened but what didn't happen. A narative is nothing but an educated guess as to what took place. But when you filter out the naratives that are excluded by the evidence and select the simplest from what remains as per Occam, you get a representative explanation of the event.

It was Strozzi, I was replying to.

But otherwise, I agree with you. I think Occam's razor is the right approach to take.

 

[carbonjam72]

The TMB test was positive on the spot of blood. They were unable to get a DNA profile from the hair or the blood.

Are there any lab records supporting this finding, or just Step's assurances?

 

[Grinder]

The TMB test was positive on the spot of blood. They were unable to get a DNA profile from the hair or the blood.

There was blood and the greatest DNA forensic scientist in the world couldn't find the needed donors DNA?

Did she use the same methodology on that sample as she did on the knife?

How many pg of material was in the blood sample?

Did she use it all up?

Did she preserve it properly did she use a container made in the USA that caused it to spoil?

I would think that if she didn't preform the same heroic breakthrough science on the blood spot as the knife that that should be a problem for her.

Wonder if it could still be tested. Maybe it's in a garage somewhere.

 

[Strozzi]

There was blood and the greatest DNA forensic scientist in the world couldn't find the needed donors DNA?

Did she use the same methodology on that sample as she did on the knife?

How many pg of material was in the blood sample?

Did she use it all up?

Did she preserve it properly did she use a container made in the USA that caused it to spoil?

I would think that if she didn't preform the same heroic breakthrough science on the blood spot as the knife that that should be a problem for her.

Wonder if it could still be tested. Maybe it's in a garage somewhere.

The blood sample is from Filomena's window, right? Maybe it was feline? Giobbi says they jump.

 

[Vixen]

Nobody is discrediting Curatolo on the grounds of his lifestyle. Curatolo is discredited because his memory of the event is faulty. He is conflating events from the 31st, inventing the precise time from a watch he doesn't have, making a positive identification of a couple he didn't know at a distance he couldn't see and if we could rely on his testimony he is giving Amanda and Raffaele an alibi for the entire window of the plausible time of death.

This reminds me, Raf told journalist, Kate Mansey of the DAILY MIRROR that he and Amanda had been at a party the murder night.

To explain his anomaly from his legal claim he was home all evening, Raf explained that he had got 1.11.2007 confused with the night before. However, the night before, he was home alone, and picked up Amanda at 1:00.

Can we rely on Raf's testimony?

Toto witnessing the pair keeping vigil on the cottage rings true. An independent witness, a kiosk owner verified Toto was there, sitting on his bench.

 

[Vixen]

A pardon's no good. It basically means - "You did it but we forgive you". It means the same thing in lots of jurisdictions. Amanda doesn't need to be forgiven; she needs to be exonerated.

Sometimes it is wiser to just walk away.

 

[Bill Williams]

This reminds me, Raf told journalist, Kate Mansey of the DAILY MIRROR that he and Amanda had been at a party the murder night.

To explain his anomaly from his legal claim he was home all evening, Raf explained that he had got 1.11.2007 confused with the night before. However, the night before, he was home alone, and picked up Amanda at 1:00.

Can we rely on Raf's testimony?

Toto witnessing the pair keeping vigil on the cottage rings true. An independent witness, a kiosk owner verified Toto was there, sitting on his bench.

Raffaele's testimony is only important if it can be shown he was involved. He's been fully exonerated.

Do you know where you were that night?

 

[Kauffer]

This reminds me, Raf told journalist, Kate Mansey of the DAILY MIRROR that he and Amanda had been at a party the murder night.

To explain his anomaly from his legal claim he was home all evening, Raf explained that he had got 1.11.2007 confused with the night before. However, the night before, he was home alone, and picked up Amanda at 1:00.

Can we rely on Raf's testimony?

Toto witnessing the pair keeping vigil on the cottage rings true. An independent witness, a kiosk owner verified Toto was there, sitting on his bench.

The only thing that rings true is that Toto was on his bench at some time during the evening. But you cannot infer, as you do, from that piece of information, that his account is plausible. You have been given substantial evidence to demonstrate the unreliability of Toto's account.

In the UK, remember, his evidence would never have been heard at trial. He never picked Amanda and Raffaele from a lineup or from fairly presented photographs of alternatives. Nor does his testimony put Amanda and Raffaele at the cottage anyway. His evidence is as contaminated as Stefanoni's lab.

 

[acbytesla]

This reminds me, Raf told journalist, Kate Mansey of the DAILY MIRROR that he and Amanda had been at a party the murder night.

To explain his anomaly from his legal claim he was home all evening, Raf explained that he had got 1.11.2007 confused with the night before. However, the night before, he was home alone, and picked up Amanda at 1:00.

Can we rely on Raf's testimony?

Toto witnessing the pair keeping vigil on the cottage rings true. An independent witness, a kiosk owner verified Toto was there, sitting on his bench.

Never mind that Raffaele disputes Mansey's account and that Raff NEVER testified.

 

[Kauffer]

Sometimes it is wiser to just walk away.

Nope. She'll clear herself. It will be very embarrassing for Italy. But watch out when it happens. Italy will claim it has changed since the Knox trial, that mistakes were made which are no longer possible, that the police now behave according to properly formulated policy etc etc.

 

[Grinder]

No one disputes that Curatolo sat in the plaza most every night including the one he testified about, Halloween night, with people dressed up with masks on and disco buses.

I've never thought Raf was the brightest bulb but even a mensa cat might be stressed enough to confuse one night from another or perhaps Mansey misunderstood. Regardless they were either at Raf's or they were in the plaza from 9:30 to just before midnight as per Curatolo. His original testimony is clear on the point that they were there the whole time. Given the tow truck and the broken down car it is inconceivable that they could moved back and forth to the cottage at a time that Mez could have been killed. It is also impossible that Curatolo and the ear witnesses fit together.

Was Marriott able to erase all the surveillance videos before the police were able to gather them. There were both public and private CCTV systems between Raf's and the cottage.

 

[Vixen]

Black hair is so rare in Italy that it is an obvious assumption that 'black hairs found; black man guilty'?

If there is more than one perp, it means others are roaming free.

I knew a guy from Sicily with black hair.

It's not that rare in Southern Europe. It's common in Ireland because of supposed early Spanish migration.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen needs to take Daniel Simons Selective Awareness Test And see if he can spot the bear.

It's a different version than the one I saw.

Try this one:
http://youtu.be/Lw-YPKR0grk