Continuation Part 19: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[analemma]

What? Vecchiotti and Conti falsely claimed sample 36(i) was not testable as it was (i) LCN and (ii) anyway, a piece of starch. What riled the court was that they had been ordered to test it and showed contempt of the court in not making an application to the court for a pass in not testing it. This is why Chieffi ordered it to be tested. It was LCN, but the Rome lab had no problems identifying it and replicating the test. V&C lied about it being rye starch as it was scientifically found to be that of Amanda Knox. This DNA was located at the hilt of the knife, so of course Mez' DNA is not going to be there (indeed, a near full profile of Mez was found on the blade).

It is entirely compatible with Amanda wielding the knife on Mez. You note it was not Raff's DNA, nor even Rudy's.

So, it is incorrect to claim "we found no DNA on the knife".

What ARE U Talking about??????
If 36(I) was LCN, how did the Rome lab test it??????
The Rome Lab ONLY found Amanda DNA on the Knife, and to say otherwise is to make a false statement that is easily demonstrated to be untrue.
There was no Meredith DNA on the knife. NONE.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's no coincidence that as an aftermath to Marasca Bruno's report, the Renzi government has banned acting politicians from sitting as judges in the Supreme Court. It is obviously a conflict of interest (i.e, being the law maker and also the adjudicator, who ethically, should be objective).

From now on, only career judges, who have taken the exams and risen though the circuits and ranks, will sit on these cases.

Nothing will be said, but watch how Marasca and Bruno will shortly be put out to grass at the retired donkey sanctuary to join their chum, Hellmann.

What was Amanda's lamp doing on Mez' floor inside a locked room, and which Amanda concealed from the police and court was missing from her room? Whatever did happen to the ear stud missing from her ear, and which she claimed caused her to bleed profusely all over Mez' DNA in the sink and bidet?

Nice sidestep by trying to introduce Laura and witch-burning. This informs us you know perfectly well the lamp in the murder room is potentially incriminating evidence.

Oh no, not the lamp! This is only about the 13th time this has come around on the merry-go-round. HOOTS!

Vixen - what was the lamp used for?

 

[analemma]

Qué? Nencini was never annulled.
It was never remitted back to the appeal court, as it should have been if Marasca Bruno want to argue DNA contamination, as neither Massei nor Nencini found any evidence of this. Where was Marasca's evidence? If he wants to bring in the cardboard box - he should have sent it back to the fact-finding courts for cross-examination of experts on all sides about the material or probable likelihood of this.
How can two civil law judges, appointed as politicians, with no experience in murder cases, sit on their well-padded backsides and claim the box the knife was stored in was "contaminated", as was Raff's DNA on the bra clasp, and yet, astonishingly, Rudy's DNA on the sweater was sound?

Nencini was never annulled.
HUH????????????
You are really losing it BAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Have you missed the news reports, which said "There was no shortage of glaring errors in the underlying fabric of the sentence in question".
How about "stunning flaws”
And ignoring "clearly demonstrated possible contamination"
What Dalla Vedova described “great censure, a note of solemn censure of all the investigators”.
Imagine having your boss pepper your Job Evaluation with performance evaluation containing phrases such as "stunning flaws", "glaring errors", "objectively wavering process, whose oscillations, however, are also the result of clamorous failures, or investigative “amnesia” and of culpable omissions of investigative activity", "frantic search for one or more guilty people to placate international opinion", "credible parameters of correctness must respect international standards of protocols,", "one must register a deplorable carelessness in the preliminary investigation phase","glaringly illogical", "Also illogical and contradictory", and ON, and ON, and ON, and ON.
I am sure that Nencini will be quick to use the Marasca Bruno Motivation Document when he next applies for a Judgeship position.

 

[Mike1711]

Funnily enough, Nick Van Der Leek posted a link and I did.

I never said it involved fact-finding. That is you trying to conceal from the reader I understood exactly what the legal issues are in the Oscar appeal case.

Yes you did....

You said...

"They argue that as she had arrived at a "fact" erroneously, then discussion of that "fact" was relevant to the appeal, in terms of explaining why her verdict, and therefore, sentencing, was a legal error."

The appeal is about Judge Masipa misinterpreted the law called "Dolus Eventualis". There is no, nada, zero latitude that the appeal Judges to change lower court "legal facts". ...which is why first degree murder is not on the table.

Ditto, the appeal Judges in Italy, which is why Clause 9.2/9.3 exist. ...and these are the clauses guilters incoherently cling to as though the B/M Judges in any way had latitude to alter the settled "points of fact".

The essential point of the ruling is that it doesn't matter if AK and RS were in the house. It doesn't matter if how many people were involved. What does matter is that AK and RS weren't involved.

Now say sorry for telling fibs.

 

[bagels]

Relax. In the REAL world, not all the police, all the prosecution, all the reporters, all the forensic guys, the pathologist, all the witnesses, all the expert crime analysts, and all the judges, bar Hellmann and Zanetti, are completely bent, as claimed by Grinder, "Bill Williams", Randy, bagels, etc.

This was a useful tactical argument for the PGP to make during the Massei era, but it's kind of lost its efficacy now that the PGP have to invent a mafia conspiracy involving two appellate judges, two independent professors from the top university in the country, outside independent experts at the top of their field such as Dr. Peter Gill, and now the Supreme Court of Cassation.

 

[analemma]

This was a useful tactical argument for the PGP to make during the Massei era, but it's kind of lost its efficacy now that the PGP have to invent a mafia conspiracy involving two appellate judges, two independent professors from the top university in the country, outside independent experts at the top of their field such as Dr. Peter Gill, and now the Supreme Court of Cassation.

Correct a Mundo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The clumsy and desperate tone of the recent Vixen rants remind me of the Hitler Bunker video.

 

[Bill Williams]

Yes you did....

You said...

"They argue that as she had arrived at a "fact" erroneously, then discussion of that "fact" was relevant to the appeal, in terms of explaining why her verdict, and therefore, sentencing, was a legal error."

The appeal is about Judge Masipa misinterpreted the law called "Dolus Eventualis". There is no, nada, zero latitude that the appeal Judges to change lower court "legal facts". ...which is why first degree murder is not on the table.

Ditto, the appeal Judges in Italy, which is why Clause 9.2/9.3 exist. ...and these are the clauses guilters incoherently cling to as though the B/M Judges in any way had latitude to alter the settled "points of fact".

The essential point of the ruling is that it doesn't matter if AK and RS were in the house. It doesn't matter if how many people were involved. What does matter is that AK and RS weren't involved.

Now say sorry for telling fibs.

Get in lin Mike1711. I'm still waiting to hear her apology about posting a pic which **refuted** the point she was making about the bars on the lower window.

There may be others ahead of us in the line.

 

[Planigale]

Agreed. It's unfair to defendant and murder victim's family alike. In the UK, the case would have been effectively over after an Old Bailey trial.

Would not have got that far. Guede would have been tried in the crown court, the case against Knox and Sollecito would likely have never got to trial if it did it would have been dismissed by the judge once the malfeasance of the forensic scientists had been revealed.

 

[acbytesla]

This was a useful tactical argument for the PGP to make during the Massei era, but it's kind of lost its efficacy now that the PGP have to invent a mafia conspiracy involving two appellate judges, two independent professors from the top university in the country, outside independent experts at the top of their field such as Dr. Peter Gill, and now the Supreme Court of Cassation.

Damn!!!

 

[Planigale]

It's no coincidence that as an aftermath to Marasca Bruno's report, the Renzi government has banned acting politicians from sitting as judges in the Supreme Court. It is obviously a conflict of interest (i.e, being the law maker and also the adjudicator, who ethically, should be objective).

From now on, only career judges, who have taken the exams and risen though the circuits and ranks, will sit on these cases.

Nothing will be said, but watch how Marasca and Bruno will shortly be put out to grass at the retired donkey sanctuary to join their chum, Hellmann.

What was Amanda's lamp doing on Mez' floor inside a locked room, and which Amanda concealed from the police and court was missing from her room? Whatever did happen to the ear stud missing from her ear, and which she claimed caused her to bleed profusely all over Mez' DNA in the sink and bidet?

Nice sidestep by trying to introduce Laura and witch-burning. This informs us you know perfectly well the lamp in the murder room is potentially incriminating evidence.

Can you think of a European country where members of the legislature were also 'supreme' court judges.

 

[Bill Williams]

This was a useful tactical argument for the PGP to make during the Massei era, but it's kind of lost its efficacy now that the PGP have to invent a mafia conspiracy involving two appellate judges, two independent professors from the top university in the country, outside independent experts at the top of their field such as Dr. Peter Gill, and now the Supreme Court of Cassation.

But you do not understand, bagels.

Carla Vecchiotti was seen having lunch with people connected to the defence. The source of this conspiratorial sighting was none other that Maresca, note the "e". This was cited on the fake-wiki in the section describing their view as to why contamination in Stefanoni's lab should be discounted.

Remember guilter talk of a wide-ranging Seattle-based PR conspiracy? The conspiracy now touted by folk like Vixen makes the Seattle conspiracy look like child's play.

 

[Desert Fox]

Perhaps I was being a little idealistic.

However, I don't believe we would have had all the leaked evidence, unrecorded interrogations, undisclosed forensic evidence, stolen diaries, false HIV results, drug addled star witnesses, failure to take body temp etc.

Also, I don't believe there is anyway the CPS would proceed after seeing a crime scene collection video like the one in Perugia, and they wouldn't accept the bra clasp and knife results after seeing how they were handled.

The screw ups would look bad and the more liberal the state, the more likely that somewhere along the line the case would get dismissed. I think it would have been overturned eventually in most states.

 

[Grinder]

I believe the first use of LCN DNA in the US was in NY State. IIRC from reading the judge's ruling on it's use one of the main points was that the lab needed to be certified for the work and such things as positive pressure hoods needed to be present. From what we've been led to believe no such certification or equipment was present in Steffi's lab.

The need for positive pressure hoods is because LCN DNA can float in the air notwithstanding the PGP guffawing over that possibility.

 

[Mike1711]

Vixen....

There is a parallel. Do you see how the Judges avoid legal "points of fact".

As in the Oscar trial so in the AK/RS trial.

This does not mean the appeal court accepts the facts. Simply that they are bound by them...

The Judges ruled, and note how they avoid lower court "points of fact"...

Directly from the Oscar appeal...

"Legal intention in the form of dolus eventualis ─ trial court incorrectly applying the principles thereof ─ constitutes an error of law.

Inference of fact to be drawn from the totality of the evidence ─ trial court not taking all the relevant evidence into account in determining the presence or otherwise of dolus eventualis ─ this also constitutes an error of law.

On a proper conspectus of all the evidence, the trial court ought to have found that the accused had been guilty of murder and not culpable homicide, and that his defence of putative private defence could not be sustained. Conviction of culpable homicide and the sentence imposed for that offence set aside under s 322 of CPA and the matter remitted to the trial court to impose sentence afresh.".

 

[Grinder]

That great DNA expert Pataz wrote:A seemingly unrelated ruling in the Queens Supreme Court, released on Feb 8th 2010, presents difficulties to supporters arguing for Amanda Knox’s innocence. Knox supporters have claimed that results from a new type of DNA test entered into evidence in the Italian trial would not be accepted in US courts. However, it is this same type of DNA test that the Queens Supreme court issued its ruling on, a ruling that allowed results from the new DNA test to be admitted to the Queens trial. The testing is performed on a very tiny amount of DNA material and is called Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA testing, The Queens ruling establishes that results from LCN DNA testing can be entered in as evidence, and is the first challenge to LCN DNA testing in a US court. While the Queens ruling is only applicable in that jurisdiction, it does establish precedence and an argument for LCN DNA test results to be accepted at other trials in America.

Of course few if any said that LCN couldn't be used but rather that the lab and the handling of the evidence wasn't up to LCN standards and that Steffi wasn't qualified to override "too low" print outs and her stonewalling on providing the under lining data.

Now he also "forgot" to mention this:In 2004 an entire laboratory was renovated in NY and devoted solely to the OCME to further develop LCN DNA testing. In 2007 a brand new scientific facility was built in NY's OCME to accommodate the advances made in the area of LCN DNA testing. During these years, Dr. Caragine and many other forensic scientists from the OCME conducted extensive validation studies of LCN testing.


Everyone should read what the US court wrote on LCN testing:
http://www.denverda.org/DNA_Documents/Megnath.pdf

The writing of this judge is so clear compared to the mumbo-jumbo of the ILE it is stunning. Is/was there a ruling on admitting the knife DNA at all or is it just accepted out of hand?

I wish Chris would read the ruling and comment as this seems an excellent summary of DNA admissibility.

Please note they built a new lab and tested it over some time before using the results in any trial.

 

[Grinder]

From the same court ruling:
Indeed, both the LCN and HCN forms of DNA testing require the same steps to be taken. These steps, namely extraction, quantitation, amplification, and electrophoresis, are virtually identical in both HCN and LCN DNA testing. Similarly, the same issues such as stutter, allelic drop-out or drop-in occur in both forms of testing as well. In fact, the OCME has prepared and followed interpretation protocols for both HCN and LCN DNA testing to compensate for these scientific phenomena when and if they occur. These protocols were developed by the OCME based upon its validation studies and based upon similar protocols that have been used globally by other forensic scientists who perform HCN and LCN DNA testing.

Additionally, the machinery and equipment that are used by the forensic scientists in the OCME to conduct HCN and LCN DNA testing are the same. Furthermore, the court finds that the People established that the machinery and equipment used by the OCME are generally accepted as reliable in the forensic scientific community.

Therefore, in addition to the court finding that the People have met their burden of establishing that LCN DNA testing as conducted by the OCME is generally accepted as reliable in the forensic scientific community under the standard enunciated in Frye, the court also finds that the People have shown that LCN DNA testing as performed by the OCME is not a novel scientific procedure within the scope of the Frye doctrine.

In Italy there was no "Frye" hearing of any sort until Hellmann.

Here's a snip from a story: The technique has been used overseas to win convictions in several high-profile criminal cases.
Such evidence also has been used in U.S. courts, and the city medical examiner has a lab devoted to it.
From the judge: The scientific technique underlying LCN DNA testing therefore allows forensic scientists to use smaller amounts of DNA evidence to be tested. For example, LCN testing allows for a DNA profile to be obtained from physical evidence extracted from skin cells left on an object when an individual merely touches the object or some physical item. The LCN DNA technique or method of DNA analysis sensitizes the standard HCN DNA analysis that has been used by forensic scientists and admissible in court for more than 20 years.

More from the judge:Dr. Caragine and other forensic scientists from the OCME also developed additional safeguards and conducted additional studies in the field of LCN DNA testing. They began measuring the extent of secondary and tertiary DNA transfer—for instance measuring DNA transfer from person to person and also DNA transfer from a person to an object to formulate accurate interpretation protocols for LCN DNA testing. In 2004 an entire laboratory was renovated in New York and devoted solely to the OCME to further develop LCN DNA testing. In 2007 a brand new scientific facility was built in New York's OCME to accommodate the advances made in the area of LCN DNA testing.

Anybody have a link to where the great Steffi did similar testing?

 

[Mike1711]

From the same court ruling:
Indeed, both the LCN and HCN forms of DNA testing require the same steps to be taken. These steps, namely extraction, quantitation, amplification, and electrophoresis, are virtually identical in both HCN and LCN DNA testing. Similarly, the same issues such as stutter, allelic drop-out or drop-in occur in both forms of testing as well. In fact, the OCME has prepared and followed interpretation protocols for both HCN and LCN DNA testing to compensate for these scientific phenomena when and if they occur. These protocols were developed by the OCME based upon its validation studies and based upon similar protocols that have been used globally by other forensic scientists who perform HCN and LCN DNA testing.

Additionally, the machinery and equipment that are used by the forensic scientists in the OCME to conduct HCN and LCN DNA testing are the same. Furthermore, the court finds that the People established that the machinery and equipment used by the OCME are generally accepted as reliable in the forensic scientific community.

Therefore, in addition to the court finding that the People have met their burden of establishing that LCN DNA testing as conducted by the OCME is generally accepted as reliable in the forensic scientific community under the standard enunciated in Frye, the court also finds that the People have shown that LCN DNA testing as performed by the OCME is not a novel scientific procedure within the scope of the Frye doctrine.

In Italy there was no "Frye" hearing of any sort until Hellmann.

Here's a snip from a story: The technique has been used overseas to win convictions in several high-profile criminal cases.
Such evidence also has been used in U.S. courts, and the city medical examiner has a lab devoted to it.
From the judge: The scientific technique underlying LCN DNA testing therefore allows forensic scientists to use smaller amounts of DNA evidence to be tested. For example, LCN testing allows for a DNA profile to be obtained from physical evidence extracted from skin cells left on an object when an individual merely touches the object or some physical item. The LCN DNA technique or method of DNA analysis sensitizes the standard HCN DNA analysis that has been used by forensic scientists and admissible in court for more than 20 years.

More from the judge:Dr. Caragine and other forensic scientists from the OCME also developed additional safeguards and conducted additional studies in the field of LCN DNA testing. They began measuring the extent of secondary and tertiary DNA transfer—for instance measuring DNA transfer from person to person and also DNA transfer from a person to an object to formulate accurate interpretation protocols for LCN DNA testing. In 2004 an entire laboratory was renovated in New York and devoted solely to the OCME to further develop LCN DNA testing. In 2007 a brand new scientific facility was built in New York's OCME to accommodate the advances made in the area of LCN DNA testing.

Anybody have a link to where the great Steffi did similar testing?

I don't have a link, but with regard to Steffi..."I don't know her personally but I do know somebody who has her fax number" and apparently it was in her garage.

 

[Vixen]

Hellmann then wasn't annulled. By not sending it for yet another trial they threw out Nencini's verdict with more finality than Hellmann's verdict.

It is over. The Nencini verdict is kaput.

You don't seem to understand that in Italy it is not only the first level that evaluates evidence.

The First court evaluates evidence. The appeals court evaluates evidence if the judge decides the point of appeal requires it. You will note in the current case the first court (merits hearing) trial lasted eight months. The appeal, barely three days. See the difference in emphasis? The latter can all be done sitting in chambers, almost.

 

[Vixen]

Your claims are fantastic. You already erred in your understanding of South African Law as I previously pointed out to you. Now you claim you understand it all....

Oh come off it. As I said, the point of law being appealed was the trial judge making an error of reasoning in interpreting the facts found (=OP deliberately shot someone hiding behind the door of the bathroom). Masipa said OP did not realise it was Reeva when the correct legal view should have been was he aware there was anybody behind the door.

Was it you who argued OP was justified "because the burglars in South Africa were Blacks and violent"? If so IIRC you then extrapolated from this premise to say therefore, it must have been Rudy who did it all by himself in the current Kercher case as Black guys were incredibly strong.

Another issue for the SA Supreme Court judges was the issue of whether the fact OP suffered from an Anxiety Disorder exempt him from first degree murder.

Anyway, the last word is all yours, I have nothing to add.

 

[Vixen]

Perhaps I was being a little idealistic.

However, I don't believe we would have had all the leaked evidence, unrecorded interrogations, undisclosed forensic evidence, stolen diaries, false HIV results, drug addled star witnesses, failure to take body temp etc.

Also, I don't believe there is anyway the CPS would proceed after seeing a crime scene collection video like the one in Perugia, and they wouldn't accept the bra clasp and knife results after seeing how they were handled.

Hard to beat British justice. There is no mafia influence for a start, although there is a strong masonic network in the police.

I believe the three would have been tried at the Old Bailey, the press, as usual, would be barred from publishing anything subjudice. The three would have got Life with a humane leave to apply for parole after six years to be out in nine. They could appeal, but it's not automatic, and it would have to show unusual grounds. 99% of appeals are rejected at first sift.