Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

Not this again! You have produced no source for these. You have been repeatedly told that additional messages between Amanda and Kercher did not take place. You actually went away to find them and could not. The actual messages, 2 from Amanda and 1 from Kercher have been shown to you. That's it! There are no more.

Why do you persist? Why aren't you embarrassed?

You have been informed of all of this before. Your insistence "Amanda only contacted Mez twice" is a complete fabrication.

 

[Mr Fied]

9


Before you pick up your ball and go home, here's yet another source:



Quote:

Critical Review Excerpt: Although she costumed herself as a cat complete with whiskers drawn on her cheeks, she spent much of Halloween night trying in vain to connect with her only English-speaking roommate, the vivacious Meredith Kercher, who was out there somewhere dressed as Dracula. Meredith had failed to answer Amanda’s phone calls and texts. Instead she continued to enjoy the company of her other friends and classmates as they drank and danced the night away. She didn’t roll home until 5 a.m. Amanda, on the other hand, wandered the streets aimlessly for much of the evening, a cat on the prowl. Since Meredith ignored her messages, Amanda called it a night relatively early, at 2 a.m. <snip>
For her part, Amanda decided to dress up like a black cat for Halloween—sweater and pants and face paint. Raffaele had come over to Via della Pergola and painted whiskers on Amanda’s face. Amanda had repeatedly texted Meredith trying hard to meet up with her. Already an empty feeling gnawed at Amanda. She grew more frantic by the moment as Meredith ignored her texts—one after another. But finally a little after 7 p.m. Meredith responded, “I’m going to a friend’s house for dinner. What are your plans?”—signing off with “xx love you.”That baker’s dozen words had given Amanda hope. She finished dressing up and then headed out into the night. She now hoped that Meredith would continue to reply and invite her to go to a nightclub with them. Quickly she told Raffaele that she would meet him later at the local gathering place Piazza IV Novembre, but now she had to drop by Le Chic—and wanted to be with Meredith and the other partiers. Not wanting to appear too anxious, Amanda waited nearly an hour to reply to Meredith. Amanda put it off until just before 8 p.m., when she had just gone out among the partygoers

~ Andrew Hodges As Done Unto You

There won 't be any apology, will there, as you knew that all along. LondonJohn was fully aware his version was carefully abbreviated, yet still had the temerity to throw his toys out of the pram.

So Andrew Hodges hasn't read the phone records either.

Can we be clear again, TWO TEXTS FROM AMANDA AND ONE FROM MEREDITH.

How hard is it to understand?

 

[Grinder]

It's a bit silly talking about 'grains of salt' when this can vary wildly depending on how finely or coarsely it's ground. It's not as if we are talking about atoms, invisible to the human eye.

You need to state your assumption.

Common table salt is remarkably size consistent. We are talking about amounts of DNA invisible to the human eye or even under common microscopes. We are talking about a sample so small that more than 400,000 would fit in a grain of salt and if it were some gigantic grain of Chernobyl salt maybe 1,000,000 would fit.

 

[Kauffer]

You have been informed of all of this before. Your insistence "Amanda only contacted Mez twice" is a complete fabrication.

You've said so. Maybe idiot Leek too. And yet you have been unable to reference these texts and unable to produce the records. It would be the easiest thing in the world, if you are prepared to call our insistence "a complete fabrication" to produce them. What kind of a person would insist they exist, call her opponents fabricators and at the same time, never to have seen them.

And you have never seen them and you cannot produce them because they do not exist.

 

[Grinder]

Stop being obtuse. You know perefectly well the prosecution case is that Mez was murdered by three maniacs giving themselves dutch courage with illegal drugs.

No doubt your views are so left field, you are arguing it's an infringement of the perps' rights to object to their criminal behaviour whilst stoned out of their boxes. Nothing wrong with three against one in your world, I'm sure.

What drugs? Are you suggesting the ICSI was able to find the DNA on a knife that tested negative for blood but were unable to determine through hair testing that the kids took drugs?

 

[Vixen]

It's totally clear to me now that the Membership agreement makes it easy for a member to spread falsehoods on the forum without any ramifications. And that the only choice for other members is to ignore them.
Just one example,

The so called "barrage of Amanda's desperate texts" was brought up first as an accusation that another member was lying through omission.

This was disproven by multiple members and even agreed by this person as a mistake, error, false, etc. Now only days later it is regenerated by this same person and Kauffer just addressed it again for what? The thirtieth time? (Probably an exaggeration, but not much of one)

This has been a constantly repeated pattern. Personally, I am tired of it, but the rules of this forum don't preclude this behavior but in fact seems to encourage it. It is hard for me to not address the falsehoods and allow them to stand unanswered. Still, I have no desire to address them and then be forced to address them again and again and again.

I'll take my chances with js202.

You have been given TWO accredited sources. Is JS202 a moderator? If not, he or she has no authority to make directions about how the forum is conducted.

 

[Kauffer]

9


Before you pick up your ball and go home, here's yet another source:


~ Andrew Hodges As Done Unto You

There won 't be any apology, will there, as you knew that all along. LondonJohn was fully aware his version was carefully abbreviated, yet still had the temerity to throw his toys out of the pram.

Hodges is another idiot. And there you go again, off to some low grade secondary source which is littered with errors and cannot reference the evidence it claims. He's even got the time the messages were sent - the real messages that is, not the ones he's invented - wrong.

There were three messages in total sent just before and just after 7pm - 2 from Amanda and 1 from Kercher.

LJ is right, I am right, we are right and you are wrong.

Produce the messages you think exist if you want to prevail. Otherwise, time for you to stop this nonsense.

 

[Vixen]

Evidence?

Google "World Health Organisation" or "WHO", together with"alcoholism". It's long been recognised as a disease.

 

[Planigale]

There is a problem with this analysis I believe. The DNA doesn't exist by itself. It is embedded in biological material. I don't think it is accurate to estimate the size of the material that somebody would see by assuming that they would only see the DNA. I made this argument previously and tried to get an estimate for how much biological material would have been mixed with the DNA. I don't remember the calculations now, but assuming the biological source was skin cells the total amount of biological material is much larger than the amount of DNA. If one assumes the biological source is blood then there is even much more biological material for a given amount of DNA then if the source is skin cells because red blood cells don't contain DNA.

I do not mean to argue in favor of the prosecution claims about the DNA on the knife. I think it is unlikely that any Kercher DNA was detected on the knife at all but I question the theory that there wasn't enough biological material on the knife to be observed by Stefanoni if the source was blood even with the small amount of DNA that was claimed to have been found. And of course, even if the calculated amount of biological material that would have been present is still too small to have been seen by Stefanoni, the possibility that the DNA was found mixed in with other detritus on the blade and that is what Stefanoni saw.

Davefoc I may have been confused. I was discussing the bra clasp.

The amount of DNA in a human cell is about 6 pg (picogram; a milion millionth of a gram, a millionth of microgram, a thousandth of a nanogram).

The amount of DNA attributable to Sollecito on the bra clasp according to Steffanoni 170pg i.e. less than 30 cells worth, relying on the definition given on http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Bra_Clasp
'non-LCN DNA tests involve 50 - 100 cells or more'. This was a LCN sample.

I would estimate that the non Kercher DNA was about 10% probably less than 100g not all of which was Sollecito's.

 

[Grinder]

I have used both the salt and the microscope and people without exception understand the salt analogy, not so much the eletron microscope.

Anyway I'll stick with comaprison to a substance everyone but Vixen understands the size of. Btw I found in my searching salt it being used for many relative size comparison

Dave the comparison was to the total sample found as per Planigale if I understood it not just the DNA. The point is to demonstrate how easy the sample could be move through touch or contamination. Got a better way for the man on the street to understand what the claims are for what was found?

 

[Grinder]

9


Before you pick up your ball and go home, here's yet another source:


~ Andrew Hodges As Done Unto You

There won 't be any apology, will there, as you knew that all along. LondonJohn was fully aware his version was carefully abbreviated, yet still had the temerity to throw his toys out of the pram.

Quoting a nut case isn't proof. You have access to all the PG sites. They must have all the texts and sourced.

 

[carbonjam72]

Apologies.

It is really hard to explain things, especially if you come from a metric background, especially without seeming condescending. I not others have explained cc, mm, microns. (Thanks Numbers)

FWIW (for what it is worth), I do not think comparison with grain of salt is useful. (As Davefoc says). But grinder asked me to validate his estimate, I tried to do it by a different method.

As has been said, the real point is that there was mixed DNA present on the bra clasp. The dominant contributor by far was Kercher.My estimate looking at the epg (electropherogram) is that the non Kercher DNA was about 10%.¹ Steffanoni's was about 17%. The minor contributors were more than two. The quantity of DNA for the minor contributors falls into the LCN range where a number of methodological problems limit the reliability of testing. Equally the DNA is 'trace' DNA not attributable to any tissue. It is well documented trace DNA may result from secondary + transfer, and cannot be assumed to result from direct touch by the contributor.

Balding a statistician from UCL has looked at how you attribute mixed DNA profiles, his methodology is sound. Like all estimates the more information one has, the more reliable the estimate. It would have been better if profiles of Kercher's boyfriend(s) and other flatmates were available for comparison. It does seem probable that Sollecito's profile was in the extract profile attributed to the bra clasp.

The suspect centric approach is exemplified here. Sollito's DNA is assumed to result from participation in the murder of Kercher, whilst other contributors are assumed to be a result of innocent transfer. The presence of Sollicito's DNA is then used as evidence of his participation in the murder. This is a circular argument his DNA is evidence of his guilt because he is guilty. The DNA of others is not evidence of guilt because they are not guilty.

¹http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/images/b/b5/BraDNA2.png

Locus:
CSF1PO KERCHER 12, 12 Bra Clasps 12/10 SOLLECITO 10, 12

The data is the same no matter which site is is posted on. Look at the original data do not take anyone's word for it.

Hey P, thanks very much for replying. And I appreciate all the effort in trying to explain these issues to the uninitiated.

One other point which Marasca raised, was that since Sollecito's DNA run resulted in only a single run, when the experts had testified that at least two were required, from the court's standpoint it had to be considered as non-existent as evidence.

In other words, not that the DNA results obtained by Raf should be read to have identified Raf's DNA or not, but that the reading could not be considered as evidence because it was only a single run.

Marasca also faulted the length of time before the bra clasp was recovered, and the fact that it was passed around with visibly dirty gloves. (I'm not sure if Marasca also pointed out that Stefanoni destroyed the clasp through improper storage).

The issue of whether Raf's DNA, even if present, would have been an indication of his presence at the crime scene, at the time of the crime, is a separate issue. IIRC, Marasca did note that DNA cannot be attributed to have been deposited at a specific time or by what means, and emphasized the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove its results are valid, and not "contamination must be proven".

Very troubling to me though, is its unclear to me that if Marasca had concluded Raf's DNA was on the bra clasp, or if Amanda's DNA had been innocently deposited in the room, with no other supporting evidence of any kind as is the current case, could Marasca have upheld the conviction?

As I've said, I think Amanda and Raf were very, very lucky to get out of this fraudulent case. Misseri and many others I fear are still trapped.

You do a great job of explaining things, and its only my own frustration at not being able to always follow that I'm reacting to. The cure of course, is to do my own homework.

 

[davefoc]

Davefoc I may have been confused. I was discussing the bra clasp.

The amount of DNA in a human cell is about 6 pg (picogram; a milion millionth of a gram, a millionth of microgram, a thousandth of a nanogram).

The amount of DNA attributable to Sollecito on the bra clasp according to Steffanoni 170pg i.e. less than 30 cells worth, relying on the definition given on http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/The_Bra_Clasp
'non-LCN DNA tests involve 50 - 100 cells or more'. This was a LCN sample.

I would estimate that the non Kercher DNA was about 10% probably less than 100g not all of which was Sollecito's.

My point related to either test. People have tried to estimate the size of the biological material that a technician would have seen by assuming that all the technician would have seen would have been the DNA. This isn't true obviously and when the DNA is extracted from blood it is even less true since the concentration of DNA in blood is low because the main component of blood, red cells, doesn't contain DNA at all.

As an aside, I mentioned that regardless of this discussion, my opinion is that there never was any Kercher DNA on the knife. I do think there was Sollecito DNA on the bra clasp however and I don't know how it got there. Obviously the PIP like to post the picture of Stefanoni's dirty gloves, and that should have precluded the use of the bra clasp results for use in a trial with a beyond a reasonable doubt criteria. Still I doubt that Sollecito's DNA got on the clasp through Stefanoni's dirty gloves unless she intentionally contaminated the gloves with something that she thought would have Sollecito DNA on it. For me, the clasp, is the single piece of evidence against Sollecito that can't be easily dismissed for one obvious reason or another. Of course, I don't think Sollecito's DNA got on the clasp during the murder of Kercher, but how it got there remains something of a mystery unless one assumes active evidence manipulation or an unlikely unintentional contamination event where Sollecito DNA was transferred to the clasp.

ETA: To expand a bit on why I doubt that Sollecito DNA ended up on the clasp from the gloves. There is DNA all over that room and there was undoubtedly some Sollecito DNA in the room, but the ratio of Sollecito DNA to non-Sollecito DNA would have been extremely small. The chance that a few Sollecito skin cells happened by chance to find their way to the clasp is minute when the non-Sollecito skin cells were so much more common in the room.

 

[acbytesla]

The difference between us and them. We approach the case with a search for the actual truth. We know that the media has reported many things that are untrue including some things that offer a positive but not entirely factual view of the defendants. Many here but especially Grinder wouldn't let that slide.

Yet others feel that any article no matter how false regardless who may have wrote it is proof. There are records of and contents of all the texts sent by Amanda and Meredith on Halloween. They are part of the court records. That is known as a primary source of evidence.

So why do some people ignore and discounts this? You might as well use Ergon as a credible source.

 

[davefoc]

I have used both the salt and the microscope and people without exception understand the salt analogy, not so much the eletron microscope.

Anyway I'll stick with comaprison to a substance everyone but Vixen understands the size of. Btw I found in my searching salt it being used for many relative size comparison

Dave the comparison was to the total sample found as per Planigale if I understood it not just the DNA. The point is to demonstrate how easy the sample could be move through touch or contamination. Got a better way for the man on the street to understand what the claims are for what was found?

The approach is a useful one, however I'm not sure the quantitative result is valid. The sample size would have been damn small regardless and contamination through the air or by contact are obviously possible even if the size is substantially larger than what is suggested by what I think might be a flawed calculation.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's totally clear to me now that the Membership agreement makes it easy for a member to spread falsehoods on the forum without any ramifications. And that the only choice for other members is to ignore them.
Just one example,

The membership agreement theoretically prevents the flooding of a thread. "Flooding" is most often the continual posting of irrelevancies as a way to achieve something akin to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack, which is designed to bring a network or service down by flooding it with large amounts of traffic.

What's happening here is sometimes referred to as "slow flooding", in that it is far, far slower than one that brings down a service with a crash. Whether meant to or not, this one tends to drive other posters away because the forum is dominated by one agenda. In the summer with some people I've met here, someone described it as "soft flooding".

Either way, it should be seen as against the M.A. 2,200 posts in 150 days, not factoring in suspension time.

I'll take my chances with js202.

One has to hit absolute rock-bottom to achieve success in that route!

 

[Bill Williams]

The difference between us and them. We approach the case with a search for the actual truth. We know that the media has reported many things that are untrue including some things that offer a positive but not entirely factual view of the defendants. Many here but especially Grinder wouldn't let that slide.

Yet others feel that any article no matter how false regardless who may have wrote it is proof. There are records of and contents of all the texts sent by Amanda and Meredith on Halloween. They are part of the court records. That is known as a primary source of evidence.

So why do some people ignore and discounts this? You might as well use Ergon as a credible source.

They use half of the Socratic method. They simply ignore stuff which so obviously threatens their original hypothesis.

 

[Vixen]

So there wasn't untold sexual partners in Italy then. No sex in exchange for drugs with Guede, no sex with all these drug dealers, no shagging anything that had a pulse.

Sorry to shatter your dreams, Misty, but even Raff in his "fairytale romance" complained she was unfaithful twice throughout their relationship of, oh, all of seven days.

Bruno- Marasca have decreed Ananda covered up for Rudy, by cleaning up and staging the burglary.

 

[Desert Fox]

Sorry to shatter your dreams, Misty, but even Raff in his "fairytale romance" complained she was unfaithful twice throughout their relationship of, oh, all of seven days.

Bruno- Marasca have decreed Ananda covered up for Rudy, by cleaning up and staging the burglary.

Where do you come up with this stuff

 

[Mr Fied]

Sorry to shatter your dreams, Misty, but even Raff in his "fairytale romance" complained she was unfaithful twice throughout their relationship of, oh, all of seven days.

Bruno- Marasca have decreed Ananda covered up for Rudy, by cleaning up and staging the burglary.

Really? Meanwhile, back in the real world.................