Continuation Part 16: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Ken Dine]

Nice post Ken Dine. Interesting information about Peter Gill appearing on Italian television.

Hi,

In addition to Gill, as I recall they also had an Italian DNA expert on the show who was generally agreeing with Gill all the way.

As a newbie I can't post URLs yet, but you can go to YouTube and search for "peter gill discussing dna on italian tv" and easily find a clip from the TV show (with subtitles).

 

[LondonJohn]

There are some substances that stain more than others. For example, blood is notoriously difficult to remove from cloth when dry. Tomatoes, which get their red colour from lypocene (_?) is another. Curry stains on a white shirt or table cloth are a nightmare. So, a dried footprint in blood, would not necessarily be an amorphous blob when clean. The edges, in fact, are quite likely to be well defined as the haemoglobin dilutes from the middle towards the edges.

Forensic police do indeed use luminol to highlight blood traces.

ETA It identifies haematic substances by the reaction of the ferrous (iron) element, which makes the red blood cell red, on reacting to oxygen.

You're confusing absorbent materials such as textiles with hard surfaces such as flooring tiles. We are exclusively talking about the latter when we are discussing any clean-up of the hallway or the small bathroom's floor. Therefore nothing that you have said about the effect of tomatoes or curry on shirts or tablecloths is in any way relevant.

Your point about dried blood stains is incorrect as well. If any of the prints had been dry when a mythical someone cleaned them up, then that someone would necessarily have had to either a) chip or sand away the dried blood or b) rehydrate the dried blood, in order to clean it up. Obviously, in this case, had any clean-up occurred, the latter method would have been used. And once rehydrated (eg using water plus surfectant (and/or bleach) on a cloth or mop), the blood would have behaved exactly as it would do when it was originally wet. In other words, it would have wiped off the surface very effectively, but probably leaving an extremely dilute smear mark (which could be picked up with Luminol).

Oh, and the highlighted part is rather strange. Do you not know that haemaglobin is bound within each red blood cell? As such, it's not possible for "haemaglobin to dilute from the middle towards the edges".

 

[Grinder]

What implication is "clear"?

I think merely the police saying smell of bleach and receipts in close proximity.

The early press had many stories about Raf's MySpace picture with the cleaver and the bottle they called bleach. It was reported that they found bleach at Raf's. The cops did report the smell of bleach but no evidence of it. As said earlier. had they used bleach there should have been signs and the "DNA" on the blade would have been destroyed beyond recognition.

I do not believe the police said they had found bleach receipts, certainly not in the first week but continue to search for any proof of them saying it.

It would appear no one can provide it. I'm sure if Bruce had found a decent source it would on the IIP site.

It appears to be another of the myths of this case.

 

[LondonJohn]

Well, daveoc, whether or not a specific receipt for bleach was ever found, and the police say, not, it does not diminish the fact Raf had two huge bottles of ACE under his sink, both brand spanking new, and one almost empty IIRC. From the condensation around the bottom of the labels, we can surmise (1) it had recently been used, (2) it had been placed on a wet surface.

ETA What was "clear", is that at the time police were confident the ACE was newly purchased, and were hopeful Quintavalle's till roll would provide the confirmation.

"Huge". "Brand spanking new". Both incorrect and unwarranted hyperbole. Big red flag.

And the ETA is utterly wrong too. Where do you have evidence to support your assertion that "police were confident the ACE was newly purchased"? And if they were confident, upon what documented evidence could they have based their confidence?

 

[Kauffer]

There are some substances that stain more than others. For example, blood is notoriously difficult to remove from cloth when dry. Tomatoes, which get their red colour from lypocene (_?) is another. Curry stains on a white shirt or table cloth are a nightmare. So, a dried footprint in blood, would not necessarily be an amorphous blob when clean. The edges, in fact, are quite likely to be well defined as the haemoglobin dilutes from the middle outwards.
Forensic police do indeed use luminol to highlight blood traces.

ETA It identifies haematic substances by the reaction of the ferrous (iron) element, which makes the red blood cell red, on reacting to oxygen.

Do you actually believe what you write? Any cleaning of the imprint of a bloody footprint would spread trace dilute blood outside of the confines of the foot shape and would be detected with luminol revealing the smearing of a cleaning pattern, as LJ has explained to you. There is, in fact, an example of this in the hallway where the luminol reacts to one of Guede's police cleaned shoe prints.

 

[Vixen]

You're confusing absorbent materials such as textiles with hard surfaces such as flooring tiles. We are exclusively talking about the latter when we are discussing any clean-up of the hallway or the small bathroom's floor. Therefore nothing that you have said about the effect of tomatoes or curry on shirts or tablecloths is in any way relevant.

Your point about dried blood stains is incorrect as well. If any of the prints had been dry when a mythical someone cleaned them up, then that someone would necessarily have had to either a) chip or sand away the dried blood or b) rehydrate the dried blood, in order to clean it up. Obviously, in this case, had any clean-up occurred, the latter method would have been used. And once rehydrated (eg using water plus surfectant (and/or bleach) on a cloth or mop), the blood would have behaved exactly as it would do when it was originally wet. In other words, it would have wiped off the surface very effectively, but probably leaving an extremely dilute smear mark (which could be picked up with Luminol).

Oh, and the highlighted part is rather strange. Do you not know that haemaglobin is bound within each red blood cell? As such, it's not possible for "haemaglobin to dilute from the middle towards the edges".

Any fule kno not to try to rub bloodstains off, but to soak in cold water. Indeed, the haemoglobin - rather like iron filings - dilutes from centre out. It would only be a blob if wet to begin with.

As we know, all three ran off - in the prosecution's reconstruction - only returning later, when the coast was clear, to stage the burglary and the rape and wipe off all fingerprints, clean up bloody footprints, etc.

Specifically in the cottage, there were footprints so feint, they could barely be seen against the terracotta floor tiling which obviously had not been cleaned.

 

[Vixen]

I think merely the police saying smell of bleach and receipts in close proximity.

The early press had many stories about Raf's MySpace picture with the cleaver and the bottle they called bleach. It was reported that they found bleach at Raf's. The cops did report the smell of bleach but no evidence of it. As said earlier. had they used bleach there should have been signs and the "DNA" on the blade would have been destroyed beyond recognition.

I do not believe the police said they had found bleach receipts, certainly not in the first week but continue to search for any proof of them saying it.

It would appear no one can provide it. I'm sure if Bruce had found a decent source it would on the IIP site.

It appears to be another of the myths of this case.

You saw from the police video the bleach was definitely there. Raff's cleaning lady testified Raf had ordered her never to use bleach, and she herself had never purchased it.

As he had a cleaning lady, why did Raff need to go out and buy bleach all of a sudden, or even dismantle his sink U-bend?

ETA Mez' near full profile DNA was found in a scratch in the blade. The perps thought it had been scrubbed clean, but Mez spoke from the grave, as it were.

 

[Kauffer]

Any fule kno not to try to rub bloodstains off, but to soak in cold water. Indeed, the haemoglobin - rather like iron filings - dilutes from centre out. It would only be a blob if wet to begin with.

As we know, all three ran off - in the prosecution's reconstruction - only returning later, when the coast was clear, to stage the burglary and the rape and wipe off all fingerprints, clean up bloody footprints, etc.

Specifically in the cottage, there were footprints so feint, they could barely be seen against the terracotta floor tiling which obviously had not been cleaned.

So you're now saying that Amanda didn't clean the hallway! So, what exactly did she clean and how did she clean it? What materials, specifically, were used and where were they obtained? What happened to these materials afterwards and why is there no transfer evidence?

 

[Grinder]

ETA What was "clear", is that at the time police were confident the ACE was newly purchased, and were hopeful Quintavalle's till roll would provide the confirmation.

Hmmm, isn't this a Chinese whisper? Some guy reports that some policeman said something about receipts and bleach, From this we know what?

Since it wasn't old bleach at all, how were they confident it was new?

What is a giant bottle of bleach? special order?

 

[Grinder]

You saw from the police video the bleach was definitely there. Raff's cleaning lady testified Raf had ordered her never to use bleach, and she herself had never purchased it.

The video wasn't avaible until later but it was reported that he had bleach. There is no doubt he had bleach and had had it for some time as reported by his cleaning ladies. Are you speculating he had bought months before inp order to have ready for murder?

As he had a cleaning lady, why did Raff need to go out and buy bleach all of a sudden, or even dismantle his sink U-bend?

I haven't seen a credible report that he boiught it or that he ordered all cleaning ladies not to use it at all. Many people use bleach on knives and cutting boards as well as when washing whites. I have bleach don't you?

ETA Mez' near full profile DNA was found in a scratch in the blade. The perps thought it had been scrubbed clean, but Mez spoke from the grave, as it were.

I thought you had them soaking the knife in bleach for three days. If they put bleach on the knife the DNA wouldn't have survived. It wasn't the murder weapon as the police were looking for a pen knife because that was the murder weapon.

 

[Vixen]

So you're now saying that Amanda didn't clean the hallway! So, what exactly did she clean and how did she clean it? What materials, specifically, were used and where were they obtained? What happened to these materials afterwards and why is there no transfer evidence?

The theory is, perps A and B hatched a cunning plan to pin the crime on perp C. Hence, they cleaned selectively. For example, leaving the loo unflushed.

 

[Vixen]

Hmmm, isn't this a Chinese whisper? Some guy reports that some policeman said something about receipts and bleach, From this we know what?

Since it wasn't old bleach at all, how were they confident it was new?

What is a giant bottle of bleach? special order?

From the barcode.

Understandably, the cops were keen to discover when it was bought. IIRC they took Quintavalle's till away.

From the police video, the bottles looked Jumbo-sized to me.

 

[Vixen]

The video wasn't avaible until later but it was reported that he had bleach. There is no doubt he had bleach and had had it for some time as reported by his cleaning ladies. Are you speculating he had bought months before inp order to have ready for murder?



I haven't seen a credible report that he boiught it or that he ordered all cleaning ladies not to use it at all. Many people use bleach on knives and cutting boards as well as when washing whites. I have bleach don't you?



I thought you had them soaking the knife in bleach for three days. If they put bleach on the knife the DNA wouldn't have survived. It wasn't the murder weapon as the police were looking for a pen knife because that was the murder weapon.

Not me, squire.

From:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence
The Bleach
When Raffaele Sollecito's apartment was searched, the police reported that it smelled strongly of bleach.[28] During the search two bottles of bleach were found under the kitchen sink. The police interviewed Natalia, who had taken over the job of cleaning Raffaele's apartment from his previous maid.[29] Natalia started cleaning the apartment in September and said she had never seen the bleach. Additionally when she took over the job from the previous maid, she was told to never use bleach.[30]

 

[Grinder]

From the barcode.

Understandably, the cops were keen to discover when it was bought. IIRC they took Quintavalle's till away.

From the police video, the bottles looked Jumbo-sized to me.

Fascinating. What did the bar codes tell them? This is great information. The police took the bleach and had the bar codes deciphered by the store or manufacturer and those told them the bleach was sold Nov, 2nd?

I'm amazed that information was never entered into the trial record. Darn that Marriott or was it Hellmann?

 

[carbonjam72]

The theory is, perps A and B hatched a cunning plan to pin the crime on perp C. Hence, they cleaned selectively. For example, leaving the loo unflushed.

First off, I think congratulations are in order to Vixen, approaching her/his/Xer 1,000th post!

Second, does the selective cleaning include Amanda and Raf's DNA? Or just their fingerprints?

If its just fingerprints, how did they know which ones were theirs, and which one's were Rudy's? With the lamp perhaps? That's more plausible somehow?

And how would they selectively clean only their own foot prints made in Meredith's wet blood?

And, I'm afraid to ask, by what manner of diabolical "deceit", did they manage to sucker Rudy into neglecting to flush?

Who knows? The Shadow Knows! Don't feel obligated to respond, I'm not really expecting any kind of rational answers - because there aren't any.

 

[Vixen]

First off, I think congratulations are in order to Vixen, approaching her/his/Xer 1,000th post!

Second, does the selective cleaning include Amanda and Raf's DNA? Or just their fingerprints?

If its just fingerprints, how did they know which ones were theirs, and which one's were Rudy's? With the lamp perhaps? That's more plausible somehow?

And how would they selectively clean only their own foot prints made in Meredith's wet blood?

And, I'm afraid to ask, by what manner of diabolical "deceit", did they manage to sucker Rudy into neglecting to flush?

Who knows? The Shadow Knows! Don't feel obligated to respond, I'm not really expecting any kind of rational answers - because there aren't any.

The fact Amanda lived there, was enough to indicate a clean up, in that police found only one set of her fingerprints in the entire cottage, on a glass in the sink. Incidentally, Carbo, what was Raff's fingerprint doing on the inside of Mez' door?

Unless there was a one-legged perp, the fact only one-side of a shoe print was found, or a perp had half a foot, hence the part footprint on the bath mat, I think we can confidently aver there was a springclean.

 

[Kauffer]

So you're now saying that Amanda didn't clean the hallway! So, what exactly did she clean and how did she clean it? What materials, specifically, were used and where were they obtained? What happened to these materials afterwards and why is there no transfer evidence?

The theory is, perps A and B hatched a cunning plan to pin the crime on perp C. Hence, they cleaned selectively. For example, leaving the loo unflushed.

That's really not an answer to the questions I asked you is it? Rather than being evasive, why don't you try to address yourself to these questions of means and evidence? I'm fully conversant with the headline PGP theory. The problem is there is no substance to it. Provide some.

 

[Vixen]

Fascinating. What did the bar codes tell them? This is great information. The police took the bleach and had the bar codes deciphered by the store or manufacturer and those told them the bleach was sold Nov, 2nd?

I'm amazed that information was never entered into the trial record. Darn that Marriott or was it Hellmann?

Hellmann was an idiot.

 

[Grinder]

Not me, squire.

From:
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Evidence
The Bleach
When Raffaele Sollecito's apartment was searched, the police reported that it smelled strongly of bleach.[28] During the search two bottles of bleach were found under the kitchen sink. The police interviewed Natalia, who had taken over the job of cleaning Raffaele's apartment from his previous maid.[29] Natalia started cleaning the apartment in September and said she had never seen the bleach. Additionally when she took over the job from the previous maid, she was told to never use bleach.[30]

First off not a credible source. Secondly I couldn't find any rfeerence to this in the Massei report. It sure would seem the implied new bleach never to be used would be significant.

It is particularly baffling why if no bleach existed she needed to be told not to use the non existing bleach. What other substances that weren't at his place was she told not to use.

If you don't believe the super clean knife was source of the strong bleach smell, what was the source? What evidence of bleaching did they find?

 

[Vixen]

That's really not an answer to the questions I asked you is it? Rather than being evasive, why don't you try to address yourself to these questions of means and evidence? I'm fully conversant with the headline PGP theory. The problem is there is no substance to it. Provide some.

See above.