Continuation Part 17: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

Status
Not open for further replies.
acbytesla said:
As I said, delusional. But don't worry, it seems that a few of your Italian brethren suffer from the same malady. Fortunately, not all of them.What you see is the distortion of your own lens of confirmation bias.

What's totally bizarre, is that you are twisting the evidence, ignoring what you choose. You have zero evidence of any communication ever between Rudy and Amanda or Raffaele EVER. You ignore that the murder took place between 9 and 10 pm. You suggest that the burglary was staged but ignore the fact that there is no physical evidence that supports that. There is no motive whatsoever. You believe that the most absurd knife was the murder weapon despite that ithe doesn't match the outline of the knife on the sheet. Or the simple fact that if the killer used that knife they surely would have sliced open their own hand. Note, no cuts on Amanda or Raffaele and Rudy is the one with the cut on his hand.

Delusional
Click to expand...

LOL. You said it! Summed yourself up nicely.

(Do you get paid for this?)
 
Kauffer said:
I think you'll like this article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/9115916/The-case-against-DNA.html

Kercher case gets a mention too:

"Yet, in a perverse way, this dependency has become a problem. In the Amanda Knox trial, the Italian police presented virtually no other evidence that the 24-year-old American university student had murdered her English flatmate Meredith Kercher. With no obvious motive, no witnesses, no confessions and very little in the way of circumstantial evidence, the Italian prosecutors built a case almost entirely around the finding of Ms Knox’s DNA on the knife used to slash Ms Kercher’s throat. The defence was able to blow gaping holes in the case, demonstrating that the DNA samples could have been contaminated by stray DNA, misinterpreted, or have an innocent explanation. A damning review of the DNA evidence by a team of American experts suggested that it was mishandled and wrongly analysed."

It's also about the face off between the ideas of David Balding and Allan Jamieson on the reliability question. Jamieson is the guy who's been right at the business end of the challenge to LCN work in the UK:

“Does anyone realise how easy it is to leave a couple of cells of your DNA somewhere?” he asks rhetorically. “You could shake my hand and I could put that hand down hundreds of miles away and leave your cells behind. In many cases, the question is not ‘Is it my DNA?’, but ‘How did it get there?’”
Click to expand...

ROFLMAOABAGASOTS This guy's a stand-up comedian right?
 
Vixen said:
LOL. You said it! Summed yourself up nicely.

(Do you get paid for this?)
Click to expand...

What's there to be paid for? Amanda Knox is a free woman and the case is forever closed. You seem to post as if we are back in 2014 or earlier, and the prosecution's fantasy is still being entertained by the court. None of that is the case.
 
Antony said:
... or, to be more accurate, "how critical the results were made to be". There is no way a speck of Meredith's DNA, even if genuine, could prove the knife to be the murder weapon - or even make it at all plausible.
Click to expand...

Try it. Send it in as a possible script idea for 'Murder She Wrote'. It's silly enough.
 
Vixen said:
Translated: No person from Seattle could possibly be capable of any crime.
Click to expand...

No, lots of people from Seattle commit crimes. You're just being silly. But that isn't surprising. That is par for you.

The fact is Amanda and Raffaele have been found Not Guilty or Innocent. You need to start accepting that fact. They are free as they should be. Nothing will change that. I'd even bet that neither will ever be accused of a serious crime the rest of their lives. Both are in fact gentle souls.

I'd also bet you that in the end the ECHR will rule in favor of Amanda of the callunia charge and Italy will vacate that charge as well. I'm interested in seeing just how much Italy will have to pay Amanda and Raffaeleven for this farce. I hope it's a lot. Say 3 million a piece.
 
carbonjam72 said:
I also want to join anthony's point, if I understand correctly, the non DNA analytical issue of context of a crime scene.

In this case, a murder confined in a small room, with a large loss of blood, bearing footrpints of only one person, whose identity and responsibility for making those foot prints/tracks is established,

Further, palmprints and fingerprints, also in wet blood hence dated to the time of the crime, also only relating to the same lone person, add validity to the premise of a single attacker.

A perfectly valid reading of DNA of Amanda or Raf from within the murder room, but not associated in a location or context that could infer guilt, would not overcome the absence of any other physical sign of additional assailants, imo.

DNA does not exist in a vacuum.

Dr Mark Waterbury said that its a scientific impossibility for anyone to have committed this violent crime along with Rudy Guede, and not have left a similar amount of physical evidence behind, as Rudy Guede did.

A scientific impossibility.

Of course, Mach disagrees. But what are you gonna do?
Click to expand...

...unless, of course, they had all night to clean up at leisure.

BTW Nobody has answered my question: Whatever did happen to Amanda's coat and the bag for clothes she took round, which both she and Raff mention?
 
Vixen said:
Try it. Send it in as a possible script idea for 'Murder She Wrote'. It's silly enough.
Click to expand...

Yes the assertion that the LCN DNA results prove the comically large kitchen knife was used to stab the woman with small pocket knife sized stab wounds next to a pocket knife sized bloody imprint, is silly. You're correct for once Vixen.
 
Vixen said:
...unless, of course, they had all night to clean up at leisure.

BTW Nobody has answered my question: Whatever did happen to Amanda's coat and the bag for clothes she took round, which both she and Raff mention?
Click to expand...

They dumped them where they should have dumped the kitchen knife. Luckily they erased every last spec of blood on the knife, 1000x more concentrated than white blood cell DNA, and made impossibly small stab wounds on the victim that looked like they came from a significantly smaller knife, or they might be in prison right now.
 
Strozzi said:
I have seen the video of Stefanoni holding, dropping, and then picking up the bra clasp with her dirty gloves, but this is the first time I have seen the two photographs (frames from the video) linked above. Look precisely at what part of the fabric clasp Stefanoni is holding between her dirty-gloved thumb and finger. It is the edge of the fabric clasp that contains the hook! She is precisely grabbing it by the hook with her fingers. Her hold is precisely on target. As a forensic collection and processing technician, Stefanoni is not ignorant of various edges of small objects - she must know what part she is grasping and is adept at manipulating small objects. I have to conclude that she knows she is grasping the hooks in her (not fresh) gloved thumb and finger. :jaw-dropp
Click to expand...

That's just the angle of the camera. Unless Raff had just left a watery trace of DNA on the doorknob - assuming Stef touched it even - there is no way she deposited Raff's DNA on the bra clasp.

Your theories make the film Ant Man seem serious in comparison.
 
Planigale said:
I think it is worth considering the uniqueness of the knife.
1) Prior to the visit to Sollecito's the assumption about the murder weapon was that based on the injuries inflicted and the imprint of the knife on the sheet the murder weapon was a small pocket or clasp knife.
2) Sollecito's flat had been empty since his detention despite this there was a claim that there was a smell of bleach, a smell that rapidly disperses.
3) A knife that was not a fit to the assumed murder weapon was picked because it was 'clean'. Other knives from Knox's flat were not collected for testing.
4) The knife was repackaged in the police station exposing it to contamination for no good reason.
5) The need to justify the swab by the presence of a mark on the knife blade is odd. It would be entirely reasonable just to swab the knife blade regardless of any mark. Yet this seems an important element - why?
6) the quantification on samples A,B,C from the knife were falsely reported as being by RTPCR (which only sample D, E, F, G were quantified by).
7) Sample B was reported as being positive for DNA when in fact it was nehative by Qubit.
8) Sample C was negative by Qubit but not put through for typing. Uniquely sample B tested negative for DNA but was put through for typing.
9) Sample B was concentrated although in theory Stefanoni did not know how much DNA was in the sample (a negative Qubit result could include levels of DNA that did not need concentrating. How did she know it needed concentrating?

There are so many unique features about the processing of sample B from the knife that it justifies a full explanation.Why was this sample treated so differently from every other? This is particularly concerning given how critical the results are in the case against Sollecito / Knox.
Click to expand...

A few objections.
First, I would object the general address of your considerations: the knife is not "unique", there is no "uniqueness" of the item actually, not even within the borders of this trial. I have the feeling that your adress of a "uniqueness" may an ideological rationalization meant as a prelude to justify the plan of putting aside, "not considering" the evidence.

In the merits:
1) it's incorrect. First, as for testimonies, the imprint was not considered the imprint left by a "small clasp knife", and second, the officers had been specifically briefed about that a wound appeared as if it was caused by a "large" knife (Finzi's testimony).
2) Sollecito's flat was searched on Nov.6 by my knowledge, that is basically the day of his detention.
3) According to Finzi, the knife was picked primarily because it appeared as potentially fitting the victim's wound, as it had been described to Finzi (he did not see the wound, was briefed about it).
4) the knife was repackaged, but: a) it was hardly exposed to contamination from Meredith's DNA, since Meredith's biological fluids had no reason for being present in the environment during re-pacakging; b) contrarily to your statement, there was a good reason to re-package the knife in a hard cardboard box, an obvious security reason, so that the blade could not poke through the envelope, to provide for security of the object and of the people who would handle it.
5) the "mark" appeared as a potentially useful element because it was a scratch on the metal, therefore had some chance of retaining cells despite cleaning. It was quite interesting also because it looked as if the knife had been energically cleaned with a scratching sponge.
6) IIRC the test was recorded correctly, but at preliminary hearing Stefanoni didn not remember correctly about having used Qbit fluorimeter alone on A,B,C rather than PCR quantification. Prof. Potenza anyway was there.
7) sample B anyway had a DNA content and that was extracted.
points 8 and 9 are questions and would be good points for a cross questioning, which is defence's work; this would have required prof. Potenza to document the work, in a way that it could bring that to the attention of defence lawyers. But Potenza failed to provide any type of observation on the point. He observed the work and didn't think these details were worth to be documented.
 
Vixen said:
LOL. You said it! Summed yourself up nicely.

(Do you get paid for this?)
Click to expand...

Did you miss the FINAL DECISION? My position is not only the majority position on this forum, it is the one codified by the courts. The delusion is with those that see them as guilty. The world now sees them as vindicated, exonerated, innocent, not guilty and wrongly prosecuted. Your position is the one that has been marginalized and thought of as WRONG.

Get use to it.
 
Vixen said:
That's just the angle of the camera. Unless Raff had just left a watery trace of DNA on the doorknob - assuming Stef touched it even - there is no way she deposited Raff's DNA on the bra clasp.

Your theories make the film Ant Man seem serious in comparison.
Click to expand...

Isn't your theory of the crime that Raffaele wanted to re-enact a vampire ritual murder from one of his Japanese manga comics, and after just meeting an American girl he stumbled through conversation with, he convinced her to go along with it against her roommate after less than a week, because she was jealous her roommate was dating a smelly loser pothead and not a rich Italian Audi driver liker herself? And then they invited a random hoodlum burglar that Raffaele didn't know, and Amanda had no proven communication with, after randomly running into him on a night they previously had other engagements on, who then sexually assaulted the victim in front of two white witnesses and walked around in her blood? After which they staged a break-in which just happened to look eerily similar to this burglar's previous legitimate break-in, right down to idiosyncratic method and place of entry?

And you're calling other peoples theories Hollywood? I mean I just want to make sure I understand things correctly.
 
carbonjam72 said:
I also want to join anthony's point, if I understand correctly, the non DNA analytical issue of context of a crime scene.

In this case, a murder confined in a small room, with a large loss of blood, bearing footrpints of only one person, whose identity and responsibility for making those foot prints/tracks is established,

Further, palmprints and fingerprints, also in wet blood hence dated to the time of the crime, also only relating to the same lone person, add validity to the premise of a single attacker.

A perfectly valid reading of DNA of Amanda or Raf from within the murder room, but not associated in a location or context that could infer guilt, would not overcome the absence of any other physical sign of additional assailants, imo.

DNA does not exist in a vacuum.

Dr Mark Waterbury said that its a scientific impossibility for anyone to have committed this violent crime along with Rudy Guede, and not have left a similar amount of physical evidence behind, as Rudy Guede did.

(...)
Click to expand...

Rudy Guede left in the room:
2 DNA instances certainly attributable (one certainly LCN, and defined "minimum" by Stefanoni)
2 instances of Y-haplotype alone (compatible; thus, attribution by inference)
(two of the DNA traces were collected 46 days after the murder)

1 attributable fingerprint (belonging to a palm print)

a small number of shoeprints only compatible with one of a pair of shoes possessed by Guede's (therefore, attributed only by inference); the shoeprints are not around the room floor, nor close to spot where the wictim was stabbed, but only by the exit of the room, apparently only linked with the final exit trail. (shoeprints on pillow, not certainly attributed, can be considered basically all in one single spot; linkable with the exit trail as well, lead to contradiction if Guede alone scenario is drawn)

I would call the magnitude such amount of phisical evidence, definitely comparable with the phisical evidence of various kinds attributable to the other two.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
No, lots of people from Seattle commit crimes. You're just being silly. But that isn't surprising. That is par for you.

The fact is Amanda and Raffaele have been found Not Guilty or Innocent. You need to start accepting that fact. They are free as they should be. Nothing will change that. I'd even bet that neither will ever be accused of a serious crime the rest of their lives. Both are in fact gentle souls.

I'd also bet you that in the end the ECHR will rule in favor of Amanda of the callunia charge and Italy will vacate that charge as well. I'm interested in seeing just how much Italy will have to pay Amanda and Raffaeleven for this farce. I hope it's a lot. Say 3 million a piece.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't call someone who brutally wrenched Mez' arms behind her back, dislocating her shoulder to render her arm immobile, yanked her hair out, thrust a large kitchen knife into her neck and then thrust it up twice more in a sawing motion, applied strangulation to break her hyoid bone, inflicted over 23 cuts and 20 sundry bruises, making her kneel, watching her choke on her own blood and die slowly in agony for up to fifteen minutes, perform perverted acts before and after, including stripping her clothes off and posing her body on a pillow, "a gentle soul".

You must surely jest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom