Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Chris_Halkides]

a problem in the run

I meant that the breadth of the peaks increases as the DNA gets larger. I don't know an exact ratio of peak height to peak area that would be a cutoff.

 

[Vixen]

Unsupported assumption. Please see the posts by Halides showing transfer of DRY blood.


Please reference evidence for latex not being 'friendly' towards preserving DNA?



Actually DNA is sticky in itself.



The evidence for the DNA not surviving on the door handle, but surviving on the bra hook? You have created the straw man argument about the need for oil, there is no evidence that this is needed.



There are multiple possible routes of contamination of the bra hook by Sollecito's DNA, in addition to direct touch. Even direct touch is not proof of guilt.

The crime scene could have been better investigated. A particular example is no fibre analysis was done. If there had been the sort of struggle described there should have been fibre transfer. This was never looked for.

So Chris is a 'Halide' now?

Sure 'anything is possible'. However, Massei and Nencini (the merits, fact-finding courts which analyses all of the evidence in fine detail from all parties, in a public trial seen to be fair, ruled there was no evidence of contamination, the defence failed to show that this was in anyway feasible or probable. You, sitting in your armchair saying, 'There are many possible routes of contamination', doesn't negate the fact found by a rigorous court of law there was no contamination.

Your argument revolves around the idea that 'the police, prosecutor and forensic scientists were bent, out to frame the kids for some unspecified reason - oh yeah, they hated Americans and thought she was a witch because she slept around and took drugs.' It's as presposterous as saying the police 'fixed' some random drunk driver's breathalyser test because the whole system was intent on framing him for some perceived personal characteristic (perhaps he liked the Birdie Song). Do you see how far you have to reach to predicate your 'bent cops' premise?

Regarding olineageousness. We were discussing how DNA is only found in nucleated cells. These include sebaceous glands which are found at hair follicles and contain lipids (fats) unique to humans, which provide moisturisation of hair and skin, especially on the head and face. The olineageous substance means that if a perp has - say - combed his hair through his fingers, wiped his brow, or touched his face, his or her fingerprints are more likely to remain longer than the normal fingerprint life of <24 hours. We have confirmed there are no sebaceous glands in the fingers, thus zero olineageousness.

In the case of Raff's DNA, the bra-clasp was found under the sheet, under the body, which itself was under a duvet, which had random pieces of 'burglary' papers scattered over it. IOW the bra-clasp was beneath the body before it was placed in position, i.e., post-mortem. (The court established the bra was ripped at the back and removed after death.) Raff left his DNA on the metal clasp as of the time of the murder; in addition, he wasn't convicted of murder on DNA evidence alone, there was a whole stack of other fact-found evidence. As the forensic team were gathering evidence, the defence team were entitled to witness it, and this they did by method of cctv transmission to a van outside, where their forensic experts were watching. We can see from the video that at no time did Stefanoni touch the metal part of the fabric. So there was a speck on her latex glove, either because of a photographic fleck, or because of a trick of light or because of a speck of dirt. None of these could possibly cause Raff's near full-profile (17 alleles) of DNA to appear on the bra-clasp.

As for 'secondary' or 'tertiary' transfer from door knob to clasp, latex is not DNA friendly, as it is organic, non-porous and non-shiny.
Once again we are back in the BS realms of 'Stefanoni tried to frame Raff because, er, he was, er, Italian, um, middle class, er from a respectable family, er, he came from Bari, yeah, that's it.

Regarding rubber: the conditions that apply to fingerprints, apply largely to forensic DNA. Both decay rapidly under most conditions. Here's an explanation of those conditions here:

https://www.quora.com/From-what-can-fingerprints-be-lifted-and-from-what-cant-they-be-lifted


All clear now?

 

[Vixen]

It's come to my attention that Amanda has recently written in her so-called column of rag WSH that she wishes she 'could have stopped Rudy Guede from killing Meredith Kercher'.


There are no limits to the boundaries a psychopath will not breach. This woman is actually proud of what she did and cannot stop crowing about it.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Sure 'anything is possible'. However, Massei and Nencini (the merits, fact-finding courts which analyses all of the evidence in fine detail from all parties, in a public trial seen to be fair, ruled there was no evidence of contamination, the defence failed to show that this was in anyway feasible or probable. You, sitting in your armchair saying, 'There are many possible routes of contamination', doesn't negate the fact found by a rigorous court of law there was no contamination.

Yes, indeed 'anything is possible'. However, William Stoughton, the Chief Magistrate and head of the merits fact-finding court which analyzes all of the evidence in fine detail from all parties, in a public trial seen to be fair, ruled that Bridget Bishop, described as not leading a Puritan lifestyle (much like that slut Amanda Knox!!), was affirmed to be a witch. Saying it is 'possible' she was not actually a witch does not negate the fact found by a rigorous court of law that she was indeed a witch.

Your argument revolves around the idea that 'the police, prosecutor and forenisc scientists were bent, out to frame the kids for some unspecified reason - oh yeah, they hated Americans and thought she was a witch because she slept around and took drugs.' It's as presposterous as saying the police 'fixed' some random drunk driver's breathalyser test because the whole system was intent on framing him for some perceived personal characteristic (perhaps he liked the Birdie Song). Do you see how far you have to reach to predicate your 'bent cops' premise?

Or groups of people can become biased, hysterical, and succumb to group think. And when they realized they screwed up badly they attempted to save their reputation and careers.

Consider the alternative hypothesis that you are putting forth: it is impossible that the lower courts and investigators made any mistakes (which implies courts never make mistakes. Hello Salem witch trials.) and all of the forensic experts and scientists on the planet who have examined the evidence have stated unequivocally the evidence was faulty and not analyzed properly. You are saying literally all of them were paid off by Donald Trump, Richard Branson, and the Illuminati(?). Big money was involved, according to Vixen. Oh and the Italian Supreme Court must have been paid off too, because they annulled the lower court's incorrect rulings and declared Amanda and Raffaele innocent.

I am going to go with "the investigators made mistakes and the kids are actually innocent" over "every DNA expert in the world and the Italian Supreme Court has been paid off and only Vixen knows the truth".

 

[NotEvenWrong]

It's come to my attention that Amanda has recently written in her so-called column of rag WSH that she wishes she 'could have stopped Rudy Guede from killing Meredith Kercher'.


There are no limits to the boundaries a psychopath will not breach. This woman is actually proud of what she did and cannot stop crowing about it.

Or, alternatively, you're just super nuts.

 

[Bill Williams]

It's come to my attention that Amanda has recently written in her so-called column of rag WSH that she wishes she 'could have stopped Rudy Guede from killing Meredith Kercher'.


There are no limits to the boundaries a psychopath will not breach. This woman is actually proud of what she did and cannot stop crowing about it.

This post makes no sense. As ideas go, there is a complete disconnect between the two paragraphs.


The poster must have deleted a middle paragraph which might have provided the much needed segue connecting the two opinions.

 

[LondonJohn]

It's come to my attention that Amanda has recently written in her so-called column of rag WSH that she wishes she 'could have stopped Rudy Guede from killing Meredith Kercher'.


There are no limits to the boundaries a psychopath will not breach. This woman is actually proud of what she did and cannot stop crowing about it.

There is ZERO credible, reliable evidence that Knox (or Sollecito) participated in any way in the murder of Meredith Kercher. Just as there's zero credible reliable evidence that (a mythical) Mr and Mrs Bianco - a middle-aged couple living near the girls' cottage who spent the night of the murder alone together at home watching TV, and who have no verifiable alibi - participated in the murder.

It really is time that you came to understand this. What exactly is hampering your ability to comprehend?

 

[Vixen]

Yes, indeed 'anything is possible'. However, William Stoughton, the Chief Magistrate and head of the merits fact-finding court which analyzes all of the evidence in fine detail from all parties, in a public trial seen to be fair, ruled that Bridget Bishop, described as not leading a Puritan lifestyle (much like that slut Amanda Knox!!), was affirmed to be a witch. Saying it is 'possible' she was not actually a witch does not negate the fact found by a rigorous court of law that she was indeed a witch.



Or groups of people can become biased, hysterical, and succumb to group think. And when they realized they screwed up badly they attempted to save their reputation and careers.

Consider the alternative hypothesis that you are putting forth: it is impossible that the lower courts and investigators made any mistakes (which implies courts never make mistakes. Hello Salem witch trials.) and all of the forensic experts and scientists on the planet who have examined the evidence have stated unequivocally the evidence was faulty and not analyzed properly. You are saying literally all of them were paid off by Donald Trump, Richard Branson, and the Illuminati(?). Big money was involved, according to Vixen. Oh and the Italian Supreme Court must have been paid off too, because they annulled the lower court's incorrect rulings and declared Amanda and Raffaele innocent.

I am going to go with "the investigators made mistakes and the kids are actually innocent" over "every DNA expert in the world and the Italian Supreme Court has been paid off and only Vixen knows the truth".

Ah, but there wasn't any scientific proof the Salem witch trial women were witches. It was all based on witnessses' uncorroborated imaginations, ignorance and barbaric superstitiousness.

 

[Vixen]

Or, alternatively, you're just super nuts.

Same to you, with brass knobs on, and don't forget to polish them.

 

[LondonJohn]

So Chris is a 'Halide' now?

Sure 'anything is possible'. However, Massei and Nencini (the merits, fact-finding courts which analyses all of the evidence in fine detail from all parties, in a public trial seen to be fair, ruled there was no evidence of contamination, the defence failed to show that this was in anyway feasible or probable. You, sitting in your armchair saying, 'There are many possible routes of contamination', doesn't negate the fact found by a rigorous court of law there was no contamination.

Your argument revolves around the idea that 'the police, prosecutor and forensic scientists were bent, out to frame the kids for some unspecified reason - oh yeah, they hated Americans and thought she was a witch because she slept around and took drugs.' It's as presposterous as saying the police 'fixed' some random drunk driver's breathalyser test because the whole system was intent on framing him for some perceived personal characteristic (perhaps he liked the Birdie Song). Do you see how far you have to reach to predicate your 'bent cops' premise?

Regarding olineageousness. We were discussing how DNA is only found in nucleated cells. These include sebaceous glands which are found at hair follicles and contain lipids (fats) unique to humans, which provide moisturisation of hair and skin, especially on the head and face. The olineageous substance means that if a perp has - say - combed his hair through his fingers, wiped his brow, or touched his face, his or her fingerprints are more likely to remain longer than the normal fingerprint life of <24 hours. We have confirmed there are no sebaceous glands in the fingers, thus zero olineageousness.

In the case of Raff's DNA, the bra-clasp was found under the sheet, under the body, which itself was under a duvet, which had random pieces of 'burglary' papers scattered over it. IOW the bra-clasp was beneath the body before it was placed in position, i.e., post-mortem. (The court established the bra was ripped at the back and removed after death.) Raff left his DNA on the metal clasp as of the time of the murder; in addition, he wasn't convicted of murder on DNA evidence alone, there was a whole stack of other fact-found evidence. As the forensic team were gathering evidence, the defence team were entitled to witness it, and this they did by method of cctv transmission to a van outside, where their forensic experts were watching. We can see from the video that at no time did Stefanoni touch the metal part of the fabric. So there was a speck on her latex glove, either because of a photographic fleck, or because of a trick of light or because of a speck of dirt. None of these could possibly cause Raff's near full-profile (17 alleles) of DNA to appear on the bra-clasp.

As for 'secondary' or 'tertiary' transfer from door knob to clasp, latex is not DNA friendly, as it is organic, non-porous and non-shiny.
Once again we are back in the BS realms of 'Stefanoni tried to frame Raff because, er, he was, er, Italian, um, middle class, er from a respectable family, er, he came from Bari, yeah, that's it.

Regarding rubber: the conditions that apply to fingerprints, apply largely to forensic DNA. Both decay rapidly under most conditions. Here's an explanation of those conditions here:

https://www.quora.com/From-what-can-fingerprints-be-lifted-and-from-what-cant-they-be-lifted


All clear now?

The chutzpah is breathtaking - I'll have to say that!

Only yesterday, Vixen was making embarrassingly factually incorrect statements/assertions about DNA, sebaceous glands, sweat and so on. Yet today she's lecturing the forum on it. Magnificent stuff!

Oh and another abject failure to understand the primacy and legality of Supreme Courts, and the ways in which they work. Which means that there's probably be a wiki-lecture on its way about that too

 

[Vixen]

There is ZERO credible, reliable evidence that Knox (or Sollecito) participated in any way in the murder of Meredith Kercher. Just as there's zero credible reliable evidence that (a mythical) Mr and Mrs Bianco - a middle-aged couple living near the girls' cottage who spent the night of the murder alone together at home watching TV, and who have no verifiable alibi - participated in the murder.

It really is time that you came to understand this. What exactly is hampering your ability to comprehend?

Rubbish. The trial judges found bags of evidence against the kids, enough to convict for 26 and 25 years respectively, despite as much bending over backwards as possible, that Massei now walks with his head permanently touching his heels. The appeals court upheld this.

 

[LondonJohn]

Rubbish. The trial judges found bags of evidence against the kids, enough to convict for 26 and 25 years respectively, despite as much bending over backwards as possible, that Massei now walks with his head permanently touching his heels. The appeals court upheld this.

Those lower courts were wrong. Embarrassingly and unlawfully wrong. As the final SC panel clearly and emphatically found.

Again, I think you really ought to understand this by now. As you yourself might say: do try to keep up

 

[Vixen]

The chutzpah is breathtaking - I'll have to say that!

Only yesterday, Vixen was making embarrassingly factually incorrect statements/assertions about DNA, sebaceous glands, sweat and so on. Yet today she's lecturing the forum on it. Magnificent stuff!

Oh and another abject failure to understand the primacy and legality of Supreme Courts, and the ways in which they work. Which means that there's probably be a wiki-lecture on its way about that too

Obviously, I misunderstood your post believing you were claiming, 'hands and feet never perspire'.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Ah, but there wasn't any scientific proof the Salem witch trial women were witches. It was all based on witnessses' uncorroborated imaginations, ignorance and barbaric superstitiousness.

Scientific proof you say? Have you seen this article, Vixen?:

http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(16)30033-3/abstract

It is written by Peter Gill, one of the founding fathers of modern forensic DNA analysis and one of the top forensic scientists on the planet. It is about how the Italian investigators and judges misinterpreted and misapplied the DNA evidence in the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito trial, which led to a miscarriage of justice.

Given that we have now proven to you that there was no scientific evidence Amanda and Raffaele participated in the murder of Meredith Kercher, and she was killed by Rudy Guede alone (the only person who left scientific evidence behind), I am sure you will quickly realize that, much like the Salem witch trials, since there was no evidence of Amanda and Raffaele committing the murder, the "found judicial facts" are irrelevant (exactly like the Salem witch trials. Just like you said.) and we can conclusively determine Amanda and Raffaele are innocent.

Seems like this whole endeavor you have undergone is a huge waste of time now, doesn't it?

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Same to you, with brass knobs on, and don't forget to polish them.

Or, alternatively, you will continue to be super nuts and claim all of these top scientific experts have all been paid off by the Amanda Knox PR supertanker and only you know the truth.

Let's see what happens!

 

[Bill Williams]

Ah, but there wasn't any scientific proof the Salem witch trial women were witches. It was all based on witnessses' uncorroborated imaginations, ignorance and barbaric superstitiousness.

Similarly, there is no scientific indication that RS and/or AK were involved in the horrible murder which is the subject of this thread.

You yourself can only lean on "judicial truths" found in now annulled courts. Indeed, what you reserve for the courts which did this annulling is simple ad hominem.

You reserve the same for the forensic scientific community which has unanimously declared the forensics of the original investigation as deeply flawed and meaningless.

There it sits.

 

[Vixen]

Those lower courts were wrong. Embarrassingly and unlawfully wrong. As the final SC panel clearly and emphatically found.

Again, I think you really ought to understand this by now. As you yourself might say: do try to keep up

The supreme court heard just 20" of submissions from each party plus two and a half days for Raff's barrister, Bongiorno. It did not look at any of the evidence nor witness cross-examinations. TWO merits courts found on the evidence the pair were guilty as charged.

The supreme court of Bruno (once charged for Mafia involvement) and Marasca - both politicians and appointed as political judges, with no legal career path - were as bent as a nine-euro note. The only way they could get the kids off was to blame the press and vague flaws in the police, with zero evidence put forward that this was so.

The pair are a disgrace, and no wonder one has immediately retired and the other moved sideways to a non-judiciary role

 

[NotEvenWrong]

The supreme court heard just 20" of submissions from each party plus two and a half days for Raff's barrister, Bongiorno. It did not look at any of the evidence nor witness cross-examinations. TWO merits courts found on the evidence the pair were guilty as charged.

ALL of them were witches. All *nineteen* which were executed. The official Court of Oyer and Terminer FOUND IT TO BE TRUE based on all of the evidence. Can't you see the truth???

 

[Vixen]

Or, alternatively, you will continue to be super nuts and claim all of these top scientific experts have all been paid off by the Amanda Knox PR supertanker and only you know the truth.

Let's see what happens!

Vechiotti is hardly a 'top scientific expert'.

 

[Vixen]

Scientific proof you say? Have you seen this article, Vixen?:

http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(16)30033-3/abstract

It is written by Peter Gill, one of the founding fathers of modern forensic DNA analysis and one of the top forensic scientists on the planet. It is about how the Italian investigators and judges misinterpreted and misapplied the DNA evidence in the Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito trial, which led to a miscarriage of justice.

Given that we have now proven to you that there was no scientific evidence Amanda and Raffaele participated in the murder of Meredith Kercher, and she was killed by Rudy Guede alone (the only person who left scientific evidence behind), I am sure you will quickly realize that, much like the Salem witch trials, since there was no evidence of Amanda and Raffaele committing the murder, the "found judicial facts" are irrelevant (exactly like the Salem witch trials. Just like you said.) and we can conclusively determine Amanda and Raffaele are innocent.

Seems like this whole endeavor you have undergone is a huge waste of time now, doesn't it?

Peter Gill did not analyse the evidence first hand nor even secondhand, nor did he appear as an expert witness, nor was he cross-examined. He was paid by the defence to write a load of drivel that the Rome Forensic team were ignorant and uneducated, based purely on the false premise, 'the Italian police framed the kids'.