Continuation Part 20: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Mr Fied]

Vixen does have a habit of posting things that actually say something different from what Vixen thinks.

V&C were the only independent experts. The others were paid by one side or the other and represented the views of that side.

The principle in forensic DNA testing is the need to ensure no contamination has occurred. Steffanoni would have no need to create DNA, she had the DNA of all the relevant people in her laboratory. As the court said if the prosecution say no contamination occurred they should show they took actions to prevent it. Saying that retrospectively the defence have to prove a route of contamination is impossible without a time machine - how do you do it? Setting an impossible standard is just foolish.

In this case it is quite easy.

Just show the forensic teams' own video of evidence collection.

From the swabbing of the sink, walking blood from room to room, right up to the group handling of the bra clasp.

We also have the crime scene photos of the changing state of the crime scene.

Clothes (including bloodied clothes from the victim), bedding and other materials thrown together, moved from their original locations.

Then we have the forensic wrapping of the mop, the handling of the knife and the storage of the bra clasp.

But forget all this, apparently we should concentrate on C&V's conduct.

 

[Planigale]

The "independent" witnesses were in cahoots with the defence - look out for Luca Maori's corruption arraignment hearing - wherein the prosecutors claim the pair were seen wining and dining with the defence during the hearing.

Conti & Vecchiotti produced a knowingly bent report with the aim of perverting justice, and Hellmann surely knew this and colluded with it.

At the end of the day they were right though! The knife was retested and no DNA of Kercher was found. There was not a sufficiently sensitive assay to detect the DNA.

Steffanoni did store the bra hook in moist conditions which all the basic forensic texts say you must not do. The result was it could not be retested - all the experts agreed on the fact that Steffanoni cocked up there didn't they?

So can you quote a bit in the report which is 'bent'? The bit where they are honest and say that they do not have the technology to test for undetectable DNA? They would have exceeded their authority if they h`ad put the sample out to test to a third party without permission of the court.

Hellman heard the experts himself, the Hellman court (not just Hellman) had to come to a conclusion which opinion to believe (just like the court did in hearing several forensic pathologists on one vs more participants - there you defend the right of the court to come down on the minority opinion), this is the right of the court hearing those witnesses. The ISC ruled that the sample that V&C said was not analysable should be analysed, no typable DNA was found. V&C were right. Hellman was right.

 

[Planigale]

Rubbish, there was 120 picograms (look the word up) of Raff's DNA (compare and contrast to Vecchiotti & Conti's dishonest claim in Hellmann-Zanetti's court it was 5 picograms).

It doesn't "fit in with secondary or greater transfer". Balderdash. V&C FAILED to demonstrate any plausible "contamination" scenario.

Answer the question: WHAT WAS RAFF'S DNA DOING ON MEZ' BRA?

Obviously, he handled it.

This is the big problem with trace DNA. No it is not obvious he handled it. One of the interesting things is how often in research papers on trace forensic DNA they document the presence of third party DNA being detected despite efforts to prevent it - and this in a very controlled laboratory environment.

There is no time stamp on DNA; one can NOT say when it was deposited.

There is no way one can say the trace DNA on the bra was from touch. Primary deposition of DNA would include a cough or sneeze as well as touch. Secondary deposition might include Sollecito shaking Kercher's hand and then (even hours later) Kercher touching her bra e.g. putting it on. Tertiary transfer might include Kercher touching a tap or glass or cup that Sollecito had touched then touching her bra. There are many possibilities. The possibility that during a struggle the only place that Sollecito touched was a bra hook that would NOT have been exposed to touch (because the seam tore open we know the hooks remains attached to the eyes until the bra tore open), seems unlikely.

There are many papers including from police labs documenting secondary plus transfer of trace DNA e.g.
Goray, M., et al. (2010). "Investigation of secondary DNA transfer of skin cells under controlled test conditions." Legal Medicine 12(3): 117-120.
This is from a police forensic scientist.

 

[Antony]

Yawn. Others have dealt with your "points" more fully than I need to. Even if Chieffi used this description, you are just indulging in the appeal to authority fallacy and in a spectacularly selective way, at that.

You can't get away from the fact that the Italian judicial system is in conflict with itself. Either Hellman and Bruno/Marasca got it wrong, or it was Massei, Chieffi and Nencini. Given that either way Italian justice can't be trusted, the only rational response is to disregard their authority and go back to the actual evidence - which clearly tells us that the prosecution against Knox and Sollecito never had any merit.

The bra clasp - just like the kitchen knife - was a cheap conjuring trick on the part of the Perugian police which never had any credibility. Your endless citing of judges who agree with you, and rubbishing of judges who don't, is simply mindless partisan behaviour.

Not really.

Clumsily attempting to sidestep the point I was making. You keep claiming the Chieffi court as authoritative (plus Massei and Nencini) not for any objective reason, but because it is expedient to your agenda. This is regardless even of the judicial fact that Chieffi was superseded by the Bruno/Marasca ruling in March 2015, which effectively reinstated the Hellmann verdict.

This is conclusion-driven thinking, as with the whole of the PGP camp: "let's start from the conclusion of guilt, and work backwards to decide which of the mass of contradictory judicial decisions and contrived 'evidence' we're going to focus on". The mystery is that you don't even seem to be aware of the fallacies.

There is no way dunce not-even-a real-doctor Stefanoni could have faked Raff's DNA. It is all done by machine. Wow imagine bottom-of-the-class Steffi managing to recreate a double helix strand of DNA to match Raff's Y haplotype (which was how Rudy was ID'ed, after all, yet no-one argues about this) and 17 loci - wow! Imagine winning the lottery jackpot required correctly choosing 17 numbers. You are claiming stupid Stefanoni was scientifically capable of all of this, and more.

Your problem is that this is very much what Stefanoni did in her bogus results. Of course she didn't create Raff's physical DNA - she didn't have to when she could manipulate the readings in order to claim the existence of the different elements, derived from DNA drawn from multiple sources.

Perhaps Raff was simply one of her own Frankenstein recreations, constructed out of various bits of DNA.

No he wasn't, but the readings that Stefanoni presented were exactly that. It was enough to fool the Massei court (which was all too willing to be fooled), until it was exposed by Conti and Vecchiotti in the Hellmann court.

 

[Vixen]

In this case it is quite easy.

Just show the forensic teams' own video of evidence collection.

From the swabbing of the sink, walking blood from room to room, right up to the group handling of the bra clasp.

We also have the crime scene photos of the changing state of the crime scene.

Clothes (including bloodied clothes from the victim), bedding and other materials thrown together, moved from their original locations.

Then we have the forensic wrapping of the mop, the handling of the knife and the storage of the bra clasp.

But forget all this, apparently we should concentrate on C&V's conduct.

If you are so outraged by how the DNA was collected, how come you have never expressed concern about the results for Rudy's? (Who also claims innocence, BTW.)

 

[Vixen]

At the end of the day they were right though! The knife was retested and no DNA of Kercher was found. There was not a sufficiently sensitive assay to detect the DNA.

Steffanoni did store the bra hook in moist conditions which all the basic forensic texts say you must not do. The result was it could not be retested - all the experts agreed on the fact that Steffanoni cocked up there didn't they?

So can you quote a bit in the report which is 'bent'? The bit where they are honest and say that they do not have the technology to test for undetectable DNA? They would have exceeded their authority if they h`ad put the sample out to test to a third party without permission of the court.

Hellman heard the experts himself, the Hellman court (not just Hellman) had to come to a conclusion which opinion to believe (just like the court did in hearing several forensic pathologists on one vs more participants - there you defend the right of the court to come down on the minority opinion), this is the right of the court hearing those witnesses. The ISC ruled that the sample that V&C said was not analysable should be analysed, no typable DNA was found. V&C were right. Hellman was right.

Are you being obtuse? The DNA found was Amanda's, in a place near the hilt, where you would expect the killer to hold it. (You do know the defence egregiously claimed it was rye starch?) It remains an incontrovertible fact it was a near full profile DNA of Mez on the blade.

Stop bluffing that you are some kind of DNA expert with a library of Bayesian probability theory by your bedside, when you have never even heard of a priori probability and believe game theory "has nothing to do with probability theory, and certainly nothing to do with Bayes!" LOL

The Amanda DNA found near the handle doesn't cancel out Mez' DNA on the blade. Your theories about the DNA are so phoney.

In addition, you fail to grasp after all this time that Chieffi Supreme Court ruled that Hellmann-Zanetti FAILED to consider the prosecution's side AT ALL, which, as judges, was unethical and most irregular.

I note, shortly after the hearing, Hellman acquired a very nice 1962 Lancia Flaminia Sport 2.5 Zagato top of the range limited edition car, one of just 99, apparently. (Source: PMF.net) - £28K in the UK used car trade.

 

[Vixen]

This is the big problem with trace DNA. No it is not obvious he handled it. One of the interesting things is how often in research papers on trace forensic DNA they document the presence of third party DNA being detected despite efforts to prevent it - and this in a very controlled laboratory environment.

There is no time stamp on DNA; one can NOT say when it was deposited.

There is no way one can say the trace DNA on the bra was from touch. Primary deposition of DNA would include a cough or sneeze as well as touch. Secondary deposition might include Sollecito shaking Kercher's hand and then (even hours later) Kercher touching her bra e.g. putting it on. Tertiary transfer might include Kercher touching a tap or glass or cup that Sollecito had touched then touching her bra. There are many possibilities. The possibility that during a struggle the only place that Sollecito touched was a bra hook that would NOT have been exposed to touch (because the seam tore open we know the hooks remains attached to the eyes until the bra tore open), seems unlikely.

There are many papers including from police labs documenting secondary plus transfer of trace DNA e.g.
Goray, M., et al. (2010). "Investigation of secondary DNA transfer of skin cells under controlled test conditions." Legal Medicine 12(3): 117-120.
This is from a police forensic scientist.

<fx Brummie accent> Yes, mate!

Accept it. Raff was present at the murder and his DNA was found large as life on the murder victim's bra, as well as his blood-soaked footprint on the bathmat, as corroborated by Italy's top forensic experts. In addition, the bare footprints in the hall way and in Amanda's room as highlighted by the highly scientific luminol experts were virtually 'perfectly compatible' with Raff's characteristically unique foot structure.

 

[Vixen]

Clumsily attempting to sidestep the point I was making. You keep claiming the Chieffi court as authoritative (plus Massei and Nencini) not for any objective reason, but because it is expedient to your agenda. This is regardless even of the judicial fact that Chieffi was superseded by the Bruno/Marasca ruling in March 2015, which effectively reinstated the Hellmann verdict.

This is conclusion-driven thinking, as with the whole of the PGP camp: "let's start from the conclusion of guilt, and work backwards to decide which of the mass of contradictory judicial decisions and contrived 'evidence' we're going to focus on". The mystery is that you don't even seem to be aware of the fallacies.


Your problem is that this is very much what Stefanoni did in her bogus results. Of course she didn't create Raff's physical DNA - she didn't have to when she could manipulate the readings in order to claim the existence of the different elements, derived from DNA drawn from multiple sources.


No he wasn't, but the readings that Stefanoni presented were exactly that. It was enough to fool the Massei court (which was all too willing to be fooled), until it was exposed by Conti and Vecchiotti in the Hellmann court.

Any citation that Stefanoni faked her results? (Please don't cite crooks Conti & Vecchiotti.)

I know, the argument goes, "Ah but we cleaned up and covered up our footprints - we are so cunning - it's not possible the police have anything on us! Why can't they just blame it all on the Black guy! It's not fair! Papa, make them stop! Make them stop, Papa! I thought you were supposed to be - ahem - influential. <fx throws self on ground, kicks legs and voice rises to a scream> Make them stop, Papa, make them stop!"

Papa Raff; What's da matter wid you, hey! gotta no respecta! I ringa uppa you quattro times a die and you do this to me, huh! I getta you an audi and half an hour after I ringga uppa you, you go outta and party wid your knives, huh???!!!! <fx Whack! Slap! Bam!> ...

<fx Sound of screaming Italian parent recedes.>

 

[Antony]

Any citation that Stefanoni faked her results? (Please don't cite crooks Conti & Vecchiotti.)

Sorry, Vixen, you don't get to decide whose evidence is fake or not - the science does that. All you have against C&V's testimony (which destroys Stefanoni on scientific grounds) is ad hominem attacks based on a misrepresented report not connected with the case.

It's just more of your agenda: dismiss testimony and judicial decisions, no matter how sound, when they don't suit your conclusion; and endlessly bring up meaningless or discredited factoids, while appealing to the authority of judges who decisions have been officially voided.

I know, the argument goes, "Ah but we cleaned up and covered up our footprints - we are so cunning - it's not possible the police have anything on us!
...

Duh ... no that's not how the "argument" goes. That's just another of your time-wasting inventions. The fact from the beginning is that the prosecution was 100% bogus, based on testimony that was either meaningless, or fraudulent, or both.

 

[Antony]

Are you being obtuse?
...
It remains an incontrovertible fact it was a near full profile DNA of Mez on the blade....

Who's being "obtuse"? This is a flat lie. A single, uncorroborated test result based on a faulty procedure does not make for "incontrovertible fact".

 

[Bill Williams]

For those convinced that some legal trouble is ahead for Raffaele Sollecito, Luca Maori, Amanda Knox, Wladimiro De Nunzio, Claudio Pratillo Hellman, or Conti and Vecchiott, consider this.....

For those who believe that the March 2015 acquittals were not that but something lesser, leaving the door open to some future charges against RS and AK, consider this.....

Sollecito returned to the Perugian Questura recently to collect his effects which were confiscated in 2007.

But don't let this slow the talk of conspiracy, and the only evidence claimed is that someone bought someone else a meal.

 

[Grinder]

If you are so outraged by how the DNA was collected, how come you have never expressed concern about the results for Rudy's? (Who also claims innocence, BTW.)

His DNA isn't needed as you have been told a hundred times. If the only evidence against Rudi was what the bent prosecution witnesses claim was found on the bra clasp of Raf I'd be on his defense team. Of course, assuming he hadn't admitted being there when she was murdered.

All of technician Stefi's LCN work should be thrown out as she and her lab were not certified and the collection and transport weren't up to snuff.

<fx Brummie accent> Yes, mate!

Accept it. Raff was present at the murder and his DNA was found large as life on the murder victim's bra, as well as his blood-soaked footprint on the bathmat, as corroborated by Italy's top forensic experts. In addition, the bare footprints in the hall way and in Amanda's room as highlighted by the highly scientific luminol experts were virtually 'perfectly compatible' with Raff's characteristically unique foot structure.

You realize you are claiming "Italy's top forensic experts" have only 3 year degrees.

 

[sept79]

<fx Brummie accent> Yes, mate!

Accept it. Raff was present at the murder and his DNA was found large as life on the murder victim's bra, as well as his blood-soaked footprint on the bathmat, as corroborated by Italy's top forensic experts. In addition, the bare footprints in the hall way and in Amanda's room as highlighted by the highly scientific luminol experts were virtually 'perfectly compatible' with Raff's characteristically unique foot structure.

Please enlighten us as to why you so much wish this to be true?

 

[Grinder]

There are many papers including from police labs documenting secondary plus transfer of trace DNA e.g.
Goray, M., et al. (2010). "Investigation of secondary DNA transfer of skin cells under controlled test conditions." Legal Medicine 12(3): 117-120.
This is from a police forensic scientist.

Once again, if you could put the amount of DNA found on the clasp and the knife in terms of a grain of sugar or salt, I think that would demonstrate more clearly how easy secondary and tertiary transfer is.

It baffles that the PGP can't understand why LCN DNA needs such tight protocols or that people give false confessions and other statements because of the interrogation techniques used.

 

[Antony]

It baffles that the PGP can't understand why LCN DNA needs such tight protocols or that people give false confessions and other statements because of the interrogation techniques used.

I think this misses the point of these kind of debates. There exists an ideology of Guilt in which the system of justice exists to create good feelings among the public, not to find the truth. 3 people convicted and jailed is better than one. Anyone found innocent is a reason to feel cheated.

 

[Grinder]

I think this misses the point of these kind of debates. There exists an ideology of Guilt in which the system of justice exists to create good feelings among the public, not to find the truth. 3 people convicted and jailed is better than one. Anyone found innocent is a reason to feel cheated.

Yes I get that they are in fact "guilters" across the board. They hate the Innocence Project and basically always accept the authorities. We certainly see them back judges in this case when they find guilt no matter how off the judge's assessment turns out to be.

Having said all that, it still amazes me that people that engage in detailed discussion of specific elements of the case refuse to see such things as the issues with DNA or footprint measurements.

How could anyone look at the exact matches claimed on the bathmat print and not wonder how that could be given the watery blood and the soft absorbent material?

 

[NotEvenWrong]

If you are so outraged by how the DNA was collected, how come you have never expressed concern about the results for Rudy's? (Who also claims innocence, BTW.)

While I am quite certain this has been explained to you multiple times:

There was a much larger amount and higher quality evidence against Rudy that was far less questionable. The evidence was collected immediately. Contrast this with evidence that was collected 46 days after the fact that was used to "get" Amanda and Raffaele. Evidence that was moved and kicked around in the mean time and had DNA from multiple other unknown people on the sample, proving contamination. There was Rudy's shoeprint in blood. His DNA was everywhere. The DNA was at standard quantities and did not require LCN analysis. By itself, Rudy's DNA at the crime scene is obviously incriminating while Amanda's wasn't because Amanda lived in the house and would be there regardless if a murder even occurred or not. Similarly, Raffaele had been to the house. Rudy's DNA had no business being there unless he was involved in a crime. There was a break in. Using the same method Rudy used to break into a previous building to commit a burglary. Rudy's DNA was inside Meredith's vagina. Rudy admitted to being there before even being spoken to by police. He fled the country. Amanda and Raf have an alibi based on known possible ranges for TOD as inferred from food digestion. We know they were at Raffaele's place when the murder occurred. Contrast this with the fact that we know Rudy was at the house because he admitted to being at the house. And his DNA (non-LCN DNA, collected in a far more reliable fashion) was everywhere in a house he did not live in, and had never been to other than the night in question.

This is all completely obvious if you spend 5 minutes to think about it, but there you go.

 

[Bill Williams]

If you are so outraged by how the DNA was collected, how come you have never expressed concern about the results for Rudy's? (Who also claims innocence, BTW.)

While I am quite certain this has been explained to you multiple times:

There was a much larger amount and higher quality evidence against Rudy that was far less questionable. The evidence was collected immediately. Contrast this with evidence that was collected 46 days after the fact that was used to "get" Amanda and Raffaele. Evidence that was moved and kicked around in the mean time and had DNA from multiple other unknown people on the sample, proving contamination. There was Rudy's shoeprint in blood. His DNA was everywhere. The DNA was at standard quantities and did not require LCN analysis. By itself, Rudy's DNA at the crime scene is obviously incriminating while Amanda's wasn't because Amanda lived in the house and would be there regardless if a murder even occurred or not. Similarly, Raffaele had been to the house. Rudy's DNA had no business being there unless he was involved in a crime. There was a break in. Using the same method Rudy used to break into a previous building to commit a burglary. Rudy's DNA was inside Meredith's vagina. Rudy admitted to being there before even being spoken to by police. He fled the country. Amanda and Raf have an alibi based on known possible ranges for TOD as inferred from food digestion. We know they were at Raffaele's place when the murder occurred. Contrast this with the fact that we know Rudy was at the house because he admitted to being at the house. And his DNA (non-LCN DNA, collected in a far more reliable fashion) was everywhere in a house he did not live in, and had never been to other than the night in question.

This is all completely obvious if you spend 5 minutes to think about it, but there you go.

The question as posed above is to make it seem like there is the same doubt/certainty that Rudy had been there that night vs. Knox/Sollecito.

The DNA evidence is mandatory to suggest AK/RS were there, particularly RS. The DNA evidence against Rudy is not so mandatory - for heaven's sake, he admits to being there during the murder.

That admission and the abundant DNA evidence against him - including in the victim - puts Rudy's participation in the murder as a certainty.

It's not about playing each off against the other; as if one's shoddy DNA is the same as the other's. The way that question has always been phrased - "how come you have never expressed concern about the results for Rudy's? (Who also claims innocence, BTW.)" - simply ignores the most basic facts of the investigation.

And before you weigh in on Marasca/Bruno's opinions about the inept investigation, they were commenting solely on the investigation that landed the Knox/Sollecito case into their court.

Disingenuous commentators keep trying to create a canard with a false equivalency.

 

[Vixen]

The question as posed above is to make it seem like there is the same doubt/certainty that Rudy had been there that night vs. Knox/Sollecito.

The DNA evidence is mandatory to suggest AK/RS were there, particularly RS. The DNA evidence against Rudy is not so mandatory - for heaven's sake, he admits to being there during the murder.

That admission and the abundant DNA evidence against him - including in the victim - puts Rudy's participation in the murder as a certainty.

It's not about playing each off against the other; as if one's shoddy DNA is the same as the other's. The way that question has always been phrased - "how come you have never expressed concern about the results for Rudy's? (Who also claims innocence, BTW.)" - simply ignores the most basic facts of the investigation.

And before you weigh in on Marasca/Bruno's opinions about the inept investigation, they were commenting solely on the investigation that landed the Knox/Sollecito case into their court.

Disingenuous commentators keep trying to create a canard with a false equivalency.

Yes, the disingenuity is pretty shocking. Rudy claims he was there invited. All the judges upheld he was let in by Amanda. If Rudy was invited, of course his DNA is there. What is strange is Amanda aand Raff denying they were there, yet scientific evidence proves she was bleeding the same time as Mez ( and how strange to make up a story, "Oh it must have been my pierced ear") and Raff's footprints in a substance that reacts to luminol is most queer, not to mention his DNA on Mez' bra where it was ripped off her.

Shurely shome mishtake, M'Lud.

 

[Welshman]

In this case it is quite easy.

Just show the forensic teams' own video of evidence collection.

From the swabbing of the sink, walking blood from room to room, right up to the group handling of the bra clasp.

We also have the crime scene photos of the changing state of the crime scene.

Clothes (including bloodied clothes from the victim), bedding and other materials thrown together, moved from their original locations.

Then we have the forensic wrapping of the mop, the handling of the knife and the storage of the bra clasp.

But forget all this, apparently we should concentrate on C&V's conduct.

Vixen and Machiavelli constantly accuse C&V of being incompetent but slavishly defend corrupt police who displayed staggering levels of incompetence. Yet another example of hypocrisy from the PGP.