Continuation Part 17: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Machiavelli]

Does anybody remember what Machiavelli said about the reason that the stain wasn't tested? It was a very strange notion as I recall, but now I'm wondering what his source for the idea was. The can't date the stain came first from Micheli I think. My sense of it, is that Mignini told him he wasn't going to provide that information and he just told Micheli to put a BS explanation into his report.

It is stunning that the prosecution was allowed to get away with something like this. It strongly suggests that the judge and the prosecutor were colluding.

What do you mean by "get away with"?
Do you include Hellmann & Zanetti among the "colluded judges"? (they also did not order to test the alleged semen stain).

As for me, I pay attention to the reason why Massei did not order a testing of the possible sement stain: because at this stage of the trial, that would be merely an "explorative" investigation, not absolutely necessary to draw conclusions.

In regards to the potential logical value of the semen stain, I am stunned instead noy by prosecution nor by judge Massei; I am stunned instead by the Supreme Court of Cassation 5th section, who decided to not remand judgement to lower courts on the grounds that "it would be impossible to fix the gaps in the evidence". I wonder how they could tell that no more evidence could be found of Sollecito's presence, as long as papers say there is an untested stain that theoretically could be semen. How could they logically know for certain in advance that the stain could not turn into evidence against the defendants? It's impossible to tell that. Also for this reason, the Supreme Court 5th section decision stands out as illogical and non credible.

 

[Vixen]

Deaf people cannot "hear" hammering noises, they can sense the vibrations.

A bit different to being able to hear.

What are sound waves, but vibrations?

 

[Machiavelli]

Why are the judges afraid of the evidence? Their reasoning is clearly bogus. It has to be a case of group-think bias. The judges and prosecutors are all companions. They lunch together, go to parties together. It is like a club. Their main concern is getting a consensus opinion. It is clear that Knox/Sollecito were convicted in the minds of the magistrates long before the Massei trial. The trial is just a formality. So when there is conflicting evidence it is the job of the judge to make it go away. What other reason could there be for not testing semen in a sex murder?

To dismiss this kind of evidence is by itself evidence of judicial corruption. Massei, Mignini, Comodi, and Stefanoni all should be investigated for obstruction of justice. But it could never happen because the courts are not independent, a fatal flaw in the system. This case is much bigger than simply the lives of Knox and Sollecito because it exposes so many structural flaws in the judicial system.

Italian magistrates are more independant than probably any other equivalent officials in Western countries.

 

[Machiavelli]

Epithelial. The epithelium covers the body, from an anatomic / geometric PoV the body is a taurus so the gut is lined with epithelium (mucosal), as is the bladder (transitional), as are the airways (ciliated columnar). What you mean by skin is stratified squamous epithelium. The DNA typing does not tell you the source. So saying it is epithelial includes a source from spitting, coughing, peeing or touch. There are chemical tests that could identify saliva or semen, microscopy could identify the type of epithelial cells, or the presence of sperm or blood cells.

Steff tends to be lazy and just attribute any unknown source of DNA as being epithelial. This meant to imply that it must be touch in origin as opposed to being cells shed from a sneeze for instance.

Stefanoni explained in her testimony she writes "presumed", and this is based on probability inferred from the kind of object and spot where DNA is found.

 

[Machiavelli]

Clearly, that stain is radioactive to the prosecution.

(...)

It looks like the stain was "radioactive" to the defence too, then, given that Vinci and all defence lawyers kept their lips tight about it for more than six months, and Sollecito himself admitted they were very reluctant to test it.

 

[Mr Fied]

What do you mean by "get away with"?
Do you include Hellmann & Zanetti among the "colluded judges"? (they also did not order to test the alleged semen stain).

As for me, I pay attention to the reason why Massei did not order a testing of the possible sement stain: because at this stage of the trial, that would be merely an "explorative" investigation, not absolutely necessary to draw conclusions. In regards to the potential logical value of the semen stain, I am stunned instead noy by prosecution nor by judge Massei; I am stunned instead by the Supreme Court of Cassation 5th section, who decided to not remand judgement to lower courts on the grounds that "it would be impossible to fix the gaps in the evidence". I wonder how they could tell that no more evidence could be found of Sollecito's presence, as long as papers say there is an untested stain that theoretically could be semen. How could they logically know for certain in advance that the stain could not turn into evidence against the defendants? It's impossible to tell that. Also for this reason, the Supreme Court 5th section decision stands out as illogical and non credible.

Is this for real?

They were investigating a sexual assault/rape and murder. There was a possible semen stain under the victim.

But there was no point testing it because "at this stage of the trial, that would be merely an "explorative" investigation, not absolutely necessary to draw conclusions."

 

[Kauffer]

What do you mean by "get away with"?
Do you include Hellmann & Zanetti among the "colluded judges"? (they also did not order to test the alleged semen stain).

As for me, I pay attention to the reason why Massei did not order a testing of the possible sement stain: because at this stage of the trial, that would be merely an "explorative" investigation, not absolutely necessary to draw conclusions.

In regards to the potential logical value of the semen stain, I am stunned instead noy by prosecution nor by judge Massei; I am stunned instead by the Supreme Court of Cassation 5th section, who decided to not remand judgement to lower courts on the grounds that "it would be impossible to fix the gaps in the evidence". I wonder how they could tell that no more evidence could be found of Sollecito's presence, as long as papers say there is an untested stain that theoretically could be semen. How could they logically know for certain in advance that the stain could not turn into evidence against the defendants? It's impossible to tell that. Also for this reason, the Supreme Court 5th section decision stands out as illogical and non credible.

So now even you wants the semen tested? Haha

The 5th section came through for justice. Gaps in the evidence? Lots and lots. Since the evidence the prosecution did not disclose could have closed those gaps and made the case for guilt, you can be sure it was of an exonerating character.

 

[Mr Fied]

Stefanoni explained in her testimony she writes "presumed", and this is based on probability inferred from the kind of object and spot where DNA is found.

Did she also presume there were bloody footprints even though the confirmatory test proved negative?

 

[Kauffer]

It looks like the stain was "radioactive" to the defence too, then, given that Vinci and all defence lawyers kept their lips tight about it for more than six months, and Sollecito himself admitted they were very reluctant to test it.

Yep. He didn't want them to frame him. They mishandled all of the evidence against him - shoe prints, bath mat track. They actually told courts that the shoe prints in blood were his. Everyone has a reason to be afraid of these inquisitional types. Years ago, they'd stick hot pokers in you to get a confession. These days they are a bit more subtle. Not much, mind you.

 

[Vixen]

You make the mistake of focussing on unhelpful matters and you make a false claim. Raffaele was understandably concerned that the prosecution would fake results in order to incriminate him and not because he feared that he was the source of the stain. We already know that the suppression of evidence allowed DNA results to stand in court despite the witholding of the EDFs which would have permitted those results to have been comprehensively impeached. But Raffaele also saw the prosecution claim falsely in court that the bloody shoeprints in Kercher's room were his - they couldn't count the tred rings - and also claim that the bathmat track was his when the peculiar arrangement of his toes precluded that.

So it's not about what the defence thinks or the prosecution claims, it's about what evidence can prove. There is a massive qualitative difference between evidence like Nara or Quintavalle or Curatalo and real, correctly obtained and analysed physical evidence.

The question is : Did the massive suppression of evidence in this case inhibit the courts? The answer is categorically, yes. These courts denied themselves the opportunity of having before them the means to properly understand what happened.

What do you mean, "couldn't count the tread rings"? Raff's own defense argued the footprint parameters were "too undistinguished" to assign to anyone.

Cops found a ladies size 37 bloody footprint, but as they didn't find the shoe, they didn't pursue it.

The aforementioned "undistinguished" print, has been assigned to Rudy "definitely" even though no actual trainer was retrieved and he takes size 45, when police experts said it was size 42 and had the same matching defect on the heel as Raff's.

When ascribed to Raff, evidence is "too undistinguished", "collected too late, "contaminated", the result of incompetent corrupt police.

When ascribed to Rudy, we suddenly find the evidence is all absolutely solid, with no hint of any of the above concerns.

Wake up, peeps!

 

[zotz]

Italian magistrates are more independant than probably any other equivalent officials in Western countries.

I was thinking mainly of the connection between the judges and the prosecutors. Their close relationship seems to be an obstacle to the goal of impartiality. I am aware of the flaws in the judicial system of my own country. There seems to be a near universal deference to law enforcement. This can, and often does, lead to abuse and corruption. Violence is a much worse problem in the US than it is in (western) Europe for obvious reasons. The overreaction against crime in the US has led to an excessive reliance on incarceration for non-violent offences.

 

[Bill Williams]

What do you mean, "couldn't count the tread rings"? Raff's own defense argued the footprint parameters were "too undistinguished" to assign to anyone.

Cops found a ladies size 37 bloody footprint, but as they didn't find the shoe, they didn't pursue it.

The aforementioned "undistinguished" print, has been assigned to Rudy "definitely" even though no actual trainer was retrieved and he takes size 45, when police experts said it was size 42 and had the same matching defect on the heel as Raff's.

When ascribed to Raff, evidence is "too undistinguished", "collected too late, "contaminated", the result of incompetent corrupt police.

When ascribed to Rudy, we suddenly find the evidence is all absolutely solid, with no hint of any of the above concerns.

Wake up, peeps!

It is unclear what you're trying to accomplish here. Are you trying to say that Rudy was not involved? You seem to be admitting there's no evidence against the other two - now it seems you're saying there's no evidence against Rudy!?

 

[Bill Williams]

It looks like the stain was "radioactive" to the defence too, then, given that Vinci and all defence lawyers kept their lips tight about it for more than six months, and Sollecito himself admitted they were very reluctant to test it.

Why does the defence need to be bothered with the stain at all!? Why push it into the defence's corner?

The stain should have been identified as to its substance (presumed semen) as well as identity even before there was the need for a defence - prior to Nov 6, 2007.

I do not understand at all this need to blame the defence - except as a way to continue to shield the police and prosecution (and convicting courts!). The fact that we're arguing something in 2015 which should have been settled BEFORE the interrogations......

Is obvious. Why is it not obvious with you? Further, have you ever argued this in the Italian language with other Italians? I don't think you have, nor do I think you would. What possible good does this do for you, an Italian, to argue this on an English language site?

 

[zotz]

Did she also presume there were bloody footprints even though the confirmatory test proved negative?

There was no confirmatory test. TMB is also a presumptive test.

 

[Mr Fied]

What do you mean, "couldn't count the tread rings"? Raff's own defense argued the footprint parameters were "too undistinguished" to assign to anyone.

The tread rings from the trainers. How many rings were in the bloody prints and how many on Raffs trainers?

Cops found a ladies size 37 bloody footprint, but as they didn't find the shoe, they didn't pursue it.

Did they? Any evidence?

The aforementioned "undistinguished" print, has been assigned to Rudy "definitely" even though no actual trainer was retrieved and he takes size 45, when police experts said it was size 42 and had the same matching defect on the heel as Raff's.

So a court accepted that an experts view that the prints were size 42 matched shoes that were size 45. Ok.

When ascribed to Raff, evidence is "too undistinguished", "collected too late, "contaminated", the result of incompetent corrupt police.

When ascribed to Rudy, we suddenly find the evidence is all absolutely solid, with no hint of any of the above concerns.

The only evidence ascribed to Raff, the bra clasp, was collected how many days after the crime?

Was it in the same position as the day of the discovery or had it been moved around the crime scene since?

Was there a video showing it being handled by numerous persons?

Do you think this could have caused contamination?

Wake up, peeps!

Wakey Wakey.

 

[Bill Williams]

In regards to the potential logical value of the semen stain, I am stunned instead noy by prosecution nor by judge Massei; I am stunned instead by the Supreme Court of Cassation 5th section, who decided to not remand judgement to lower courts on the grounds that "it would be impossible to fix the gaps in the evidence". I wonder how they could tell that no more evidence could be found of Sollecito's presence, as long as papers say there is an untested stain that theoretically could be semen. How could they logically know for certain in advance that the stain could not turn into evidence against the defendants? It's impossible to tell that. Also for this reason, the Supreme Court 5th section decision stands out as illogical and non credible.

LOL!

How many Italian evidentiary courts does it take to make a case against Sollecito. How many times do you get to prosecute Sollecito? For heaven's sake, the Sollecito defence petitioned the Nencini court to test the stain. Do you hear that? Let it me repeated lest you missed it.... the Sollecito defence petitioned the Nencini court to test the stain.

There. I even highlighted it so you don't miss it. The Nencini court dismissed the request, and my recollection is that the Crini prosecution did not object.

How many times do you want Sollecito dragged into court to make a case against him? If Section 5 of the ISC had remanded, they are not like Section 1. The Chieffi section would have remanded and ordered that the stain be found to be Raffaele's!!!!!

For heaven's sake, Machiavelli, you've lost the plot here. Even the Chieffi court ignored the stain. Whatever conspiracy you can dream up for Section 5, you're gong to have to include Section 1 on that.

It's a little late in the game, post-acquittal, to be asking for the court to order the stain tested. I thought you agreed with Judge Massei's totally insane reasoning about why it was logical not to test to begin with!!!! Which of your ever changing rationales are you going with today?

You've really lost the plot. Confirmation bias does that. (Once again, why are you not on an Italian forum calling for this, in the Italian language? Why call for this on an English-forum where it will do no good?)

 

[sept79]

Clearly, that stain is radioactive to the prosecution.

Massei was clear.... in his 2010 motivations report he said that Meredith had had an active sex life, and the stain could be anyone's, most likely her then-current boyfriend. The compelling issue for Massei was that "DNA cannot be dated" as to when it was deposited at the scene. Ergo, it was irrelevant to this case.

When one reads reasoning like that, one can only .

One suspects the fix was in when Massei goes on to use Knox's DNA in the bathroom and cottage she lived in to convict her; because, presumably, Knox's DNA presence could only have been a result of her participation in the murder. The term "double standard" is about the most tame assessment one can make.....
.
.
.

It didn't matter what evidence of innocence was presented by the defense, Massei was going to convict . . .

As Steve Moore has said, "how can Massei look at himself in a mirror?"

 

[RWVBWL]

The Shoe Rrings vs The Bra Clasp vs The Un-Tested Presumed Seminal Fluid

As for me, I pay attention to the reason why Massei did not order a testing of the possible sement stain: because at this stage of the trial, that would be merely an "explorative" investigation, not absolutely necessary to draw conclusions.

Hi Machiavelli,
Remember back in early January of 2008,
well before The Massei Trial even began,
when Raffaele's father went on Matrix and pointed out that the shoe prints rings were wrong?
I bet you do recall this info...

Here's a couple of snippets of early reporting I found:
Francesco Sollecito and his expert prof. Vinci "demonstrating" that the shoe print wasn't Raffaele's.
+
The shoe print could really be not Raffaele's.
It could be Rudy's since a similar print was in his house.(*)

* * *

Why am I bringing this up?
Because this happened right about then, also:

RAFFAELE NAILED!

They were late for Christmas but with the sales time a nice gift arrived for Meredith.
Raffaele Sollecito's Dna has been found on Meredith's bra.
And now they can forget about the so doubtful shoe print.(*)

* * *

Machiavelli,
there has been soooo much controversy about Raffaele's DNA on Miss Kercher bra clasp,
heck I just also read that back in Jan. 2008,
The Sun had reported there was DNA of two strangers on Meredith's bra,
but today Scientifica denied this possibility.(*)

(*) - Link:
http://web.archive.org/web/20101015182759/http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archive.html



Don't you think that IF Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni,
waaay before The Massei Court even got involved, had tested the presumed seminal fluid found between Meredith's naked legs splayed apart on her pillow, and it was from [SIZE="-7"]Raff[/SIZE], that it would have had RAFFAELE NAILED! much, much better than the bra clasp result, which, back in Jan. 2008, was apparently already coming under question regarding other men's DNA on it also, which Scientifica denied, which we now know was a lie?

Those jizz stains weren't from 2, 3, or 4 different males like the DNA on Meredith's bra clasp is.

And I bet that Dr. Stefanoni would not have had a problem re-testing the seminal fluid sample for ID confirmation,
as there was plenty of sample to use + re-use.

That is not [SIZE="-7"]Raffaele[/SIZE]'s semen.

 

[Mr Fied]

There was no confirmatory test. TMB is also a presumptive test.

Sorry, would secondary test be better?

 

[acbytesla]

What do you mean by "get away with"?
Do you include Hellmann & Zanetti among the "colluded judges"? (they also did not order to test the alleged semen stain).

As for me, I pay attention to the reason why Massei did not order a testing of the possible sement stain: because at this stage of the trial, that would be merely an "explorative" investigation, not absolutely necessary to draw conclusions.

In regards to the potential logical value of the semen stain, I am stunned instead noy by prosecution nor by judge Massei; I am stunned instead by the Supreme Court of Cassation 5th section, who decided to not remand judgement to lower courts on the grounds that "it would be impossible to fix the gaps in the evidence". I wonder how they could tell that no more evidence could be found of Sollecito's presence, as long as papers say there is an untested stain that theoretically could be semen. How could they logically know for certain in advance that the stain could not turn into evidence against the defendants? It's impossible to tell that. Also for this reason, the Supreme Court 5th section decision stands out as illogical and non credible.

You make me laugh! And I assume you think Nencini was credible? His court was ordered to review 3 items and that particularly 1 of those items would be decisive. Nencini only reviewed 2 of those items, both of which were favorable to the defense and somehow his court ruled that the defendants were guilty?

The real truth is that you refuse to use that big brain of yours honestly.

While I think the putative semen stain should have been tested, (flabbergasted that it never was) I don't think it would make much difference to the defense. It could only have been detrimental to them,. The reason of course is that there are only 4 possible results from that test.

1. It wasn't semen and no DNA was found.
2. The semen belonged to Raffaele. (Game, set and match)
3. The semen belonged to Rudy. The prosecution would argue "so what", that doesn't mean Raffaele was there.
4 The semen had unknown DNA. We don't know who it belonged to.