Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Stacyhs]

It's really not difficult, Stacy: you simply clean in the obvious places.
The obvious places were the visible bloody shoeprints, the bathmat, the sink/faucet where they allegedly washed off blood and which had visible blood on it, the light switch smeared with visible blood and the floor where they allegedly walked with bloody feet. Yet the hall has INTACT footprints which show the floor was not washed.

There were a lot of smeared footprints in Amanda's room, consistent with the pair shuffling around on a soft cloth ( from this the shuffled bathmat story was born).
Good work, Detective! Just one problem. No blood was detected in any of those footprints. And how amazing to find Amanda's footprints in her own bedroom!

Forensic police can only test a limited number of places, so which places do they select for their forensic testing? That's right: exactly the same places the perps cleaned up!

That cunning and astute 20 year old knew exactly where the police would take samples from! Amazing! "Raff, don't bother cleaning up that blood because the police won't test that part. Leave Meredith's sweatshirt, jeans, and bra because the police won't test the parts we touched when we held her down. And leave the bath mat because I know your DNA won't show up in the part they test.

Do you read what you write before posting?

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Do you read what you write before posting

I think she does. That is what makes this thread so great after all these years.

 

[Vixen]

LOL!

The hits just keep on coming! Truly, you need to see Winterbottom's film based on that book. In the hands of screenplay writer Paul Viragh, Nadeau was completely trashed!

But this is a good one. Quoting from Nadeau, without providing the cite itself. My bet is that it does not exist, or else you would have printed the cite.

It's a short book, so easy for you to find.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen - I refer you to Continuation 16 of this thread, around page 12, where the copyright infringement issue was discussed at length.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10682957#post10682957

Van der Leek's account was suspended, and he had to remove the timeline - not at the original author's insistence, but a the insistence of the e-publisher. So far your view of that wee dust-up has not been exactly "accurate".

Quelle surprise.

Karen complained to Amazon and falsely made a claim of plagiarism. Had she simply contacted Nick, he could easily have edited the MS and updated the revised book sans the time-line.

No, it was just a spiteful attempt to sabotage his book, just because she didn't agree with his opinion of the case.

He sent a legal letter as attempting to damage someone's livelihood is a serious issue.

 

[Vixen]

Unfortunately for what you've just posted, people saved "gentleman" Nick's offerings.

And please drop it with the "paid shills" factoid. That is very tiresome. Esp. coming from someone with a vested interest in his e-book.

Perhaps "gentleman" Nick never passed on to you how he'd harassed someone completely uninvolved in this, thinking she/he was that Seattleite!

Whatever, the army of unpaid shills, then.

I saw the copy letter and it was a polite request to contact Amazon and take off the block she had instigated on his book. Amazon's advice was for the pair to sort it out between themselves, and that's what he was doing when he contacted her.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen leads the league in not addressing anything in posts put to her - like with what LJ posted.

Vixen puts in the work upthread to demonstrate that the stories AK and RS told about the leak at his place means....... what, exactly? That they fomented a conspiracy against Raffaele's landlord to avoid having his damage deposit revoked?

Thanks should be given to Vixen, though for actually putting together something a little more meaty than the usual ad hominem she offers.

Shame should go to Vixen for lying about not sexualizing things in her posts - twice she made mention that one fondled the other when trying to fix the leaky pipe.

It's the kind of thing one would miss if someone else were using their account.

OK so I made a humorous reference to Raff's dad being a doctor specialising in 'water works' <ahem> as it were. That's just British humour. We find scatalogical humour extremely hilarious.

 

[Vixen]

Ummmmm... Vixen, did you know that Van der Leek 'published' 30 books in the space of 18 months? Granted, they were all online Ebooks, but still! Can you tell us how much study/investigation of each case he wrote/fantasized about he could possibly have achieved in that time frame? In your opinion of course.
Thanks in advance.

What? Publishing is a business like any other. Some businesses have one or two products, some have hundreds. Nick and Lisa have 30.

It's a free market.

 

[Vixen]

Ah, yes. A shining example of guilter logic. Reasoning by completely incorrect analogy. DNA is like soup! You spill it and clean up the stain! Easy peasy!

Except DNA is microscopic (unless you extract a huge amount from a large mass of tissue) and cannot be seen. So you don't know where the "soup stain" is located. So you have no way of knowing where to clean it up.

I am starting to realize why you can never get anything right. Did you ever consider that maybe, DNA isn't like soup, so the world renowned forensic genetics experts like Peter Gill and Bruce Budowle who have commented on this case may be correct about the evidence? Remember, you think "DNA spills" are like "soup". These people are the founding father of modern forensic DNA technology. Just something to think about lol.

DNA comes from organic matter. That matter is often red, or green or mushy brown. As Planigale has told you, DNA is sticky

 

[Vixen]

I'm not the one making the sleazy "fondling" comments; you are.
I see you still have not (cannot) provide any evidence of this ever happening. Why not just admit it like a mature adult?

Shan't.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

DNA comes from organic matter. That matter is often red, or green or mushy brown. As Planigale has told you, DNA is sticky

Vixen logic!:

"DNA often comes from matter that is red, green, or mushy brown." = "DNA always comes from matter that is red, green, or mushy brown."

Except that is completely wrong. DNA can come from samples as small as a few skin cells. You cannot see a few skin cells, Vixen. Microscopic, and all that. Microscopic means it is too small to see with the naked eye, if you didn't pick that up in your elite university classes. See http://www.dnaforensics.com/touchdna.aspx

DNA is indeed sticky. I have no idea what that has to do with anything.

Literally nothing you say is correct. Ever. It is quite an accomplishment.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Also why weren't Amanda and Raffaele's DNA mixed with Meredith and/or Rudy's in the murder room? Did they collect the blood, extract the DNA, separate all the different DNA with Amanda's magic wand, put Meredith's DNA back together with Rudy's DNA, and then put it back in the room?

Or are you just crazy and Rudy did it by himself and no witchcraft nor magic wands were involved?

 

[christianahannah]

Also why weren't Amanda and Raffaele's DNA mixed with Meredith and/or Rudy's in the murder room? Did they collect the blood, extract the DNA, separate all the different DNA with Amanda's magic wand, put Meredith's DNA back together with Rudy's DNA, and then put it back in the room?

Or are you just crazy and Rudy did it by himself and no witchcraft nor magic wands were involved?

Wasn't the bra clasp a mixture of Meredith's and Raffaele's DNA? That was the reason for the Y-haplotype test? However I realize the validity of those results are under dispute.

 

[Bill Williams]

Whatever, the army of unpaid shills, then.

I saw the copy letter and it was a polite request to contact Amazon and take off the block she had instigated on his book. Amazon's advice was for the pair to sort it out between themselves, and that's what he was doing when he contacted her.

Sigh.

You simply show a complete disregard for facts. No, the two of them were not asked to sort it out. NVDL plagiarized and his account was suspended until **he** corrected his ways.

I posted the link above which showed this, from the very ISF thread in which ** you** participated. You modify things as you go.....

 

[Stacyhs]

Shan't.

Of course not. Like I said, it's something a mature adult would do.

 

[Stacyhs]

What? Publishing is a business like any other. Some businesses have one or two products, some have hundreds. Nick and Lisa have 30.

It's a free market.

Nick didn't just "publish" 30 books in 18 months. He WROTE 30 books in that time. It is impossible for him to have researched carefully 30 books in that time without simply reading whatever he found on the internet and basically regurgitating what he decided was "true". Come on, Vixen, even you know that. You just can't admit it.

To thy own self be true.

 

[Vixen]

Nick didn't just "publish" 30 books in 18 months. He WROTE 30 books in that time. It is impossible for him to have researched carefully 30 books in that time without simply reading whatever he found on the internet and basically regurgitating what he decided was "true". Come on, Vixen, even you know that. You just can't admit it.

To thy own self be true.

Jack Kerouac wrote On the Road in five and a half hours.

Some people are just prolific.

 

[Bill Williams]

Jack Kerouac wrote On the Road in five and a half hours.

Some people are just prolific.

It helps one's prolific output when they cut and paste from other sources. You yourself in May 2015 said that the case had not even been on his radar earlier in the month. Then he has his e-book out, then he gets into such copyright trouble his account is suspended.

Ya right, a regular Jack Kerouac.

 

[Stacyhs]

Jack Kerouac wrote On the Road in five and a half hours.
Another Vixen factoid easily proved false.

"Legend has it that Kerouac wrote On the Road in three weeks, typing it almost nonstop on a 120-foot roll of paper. The truth is that the book actually had a much longer, bumpier journey from inspiration to publication, complete with multiple rewrites, repeated rejections and a dog who — well, On the Road wasn't homework, but we all know what dogs do."

"But Kerouac's brother-in-law and executor, John Sampas, says the three-week story is a kind of self-created myth. "Three weeks" is what Kerouac answered when talk-show host Steve Allen asked how long it took to write On the Road.

And so this gave the impression that Jack just spontaneously wrote this book in three weeks," Sampas says. "I think what Jack should've said was, 'I typed it up in three weeks.'"

Kerouac scholar Paul Marion agrees.

"In truth, Marion says, Kerouac heavily reworked On the Road — first in his head, then in his journals between 1947 and 1949, and then again on his typewriter.

Between 1951 and 1957, Kerouac tinkered with as many as six drafts in a desperate attempt to get editors to accept his work, according to Sampas. A letter from Kerouac to fellow beat writer Neal Cassady, dated June 1951, complains about a rejection from one publisher and mentions that Kerouac is shopping for an agent. "
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11709924

Some people are just prolific.[/QUOTE]

And some people just make stuff up as they go along thinking no one will notice.

 

[Stacyhs]

Would, could, should. If my granny wore trousers she could be my grandfather.

Amanda told police she had never used the washing machine (in over six weeks) yet some of her things were found bundled in with Mez' and Filomena's that morning, presumably to avoid it looking like a Mez-clothes only clean up.[/QUOTE]

Um..no. I just read that page in Nadeau's book. Nadeau was claiming that Raff and Amanda put Meredith's clothes in the washing machine but that "'Amanda later testified she had never used the washing machine". She meant that day, not "in over six weeks". You made that part up. In fact, here is Amanda's testimony June 9, 2009:

"LG: In relation to these clothes, had you done laundry that morning? Had you done washing together or separately, or used the drying rack? Did you do any kind of laundry or activity on that morning?

AK: Well, it was totally normal fo me to put things on the drying rack along with the things belonging to the others. So, yes, I took the things I had that were dry and I put them in my room.

LG: Was it also normal for you to mix clothes together inside the washing machine?

AK: It was normal, when someone needed to use it, they just put stuff in and did it. Yes, yes."

Nadeau also claims the washing machine was still warm when officers arrived. She got that from a false report by Richard Owen. No officer, or anyone else, ever testified the machine was warm (or running).

Since the clothes Meredith was wearing when she was murdered were all found unwashed either on her or in her room, just what would be the purpose of washing her other clothes?

 

[Planigale]

Would, could, should. If my granny wore trousers she could be my grandfather.

Amanda told police she had never used the washing machine (in over six weeks) yet some of her things were found bundled in with Mez' and Filomena's that morning, presumably to avoid it looking like a Mez-clothes only clean up.[/QUOTE]

Um..no. I just read that page in Nadeau's book. Nadeau was claiming that Raff and Amanda put Meredith's clothes in the washing machine but that "'Amanda later testified she had never used the washing machine". She meant that day, not "never". You made that part up. In fact, here is Amanda's testimony June 9, 2009:

"LG: In relation to these clothes, had you done laundry that morning? Had you done washing together or separately, or used the drying rack? Did you do any kind of laundry or activity on that morning?

AK: Well, I was totally normal fo me to put things on the drying rack along with the things belonging to the others. So, yes, I took the things I had that were dry and I put them in my room.

LG: Was it also normal for you to mix clothes together inside the washing machine?

AK: It was normal, when someone needed to use it, they just put stuff in and did it. Yes, yes."

Nadeau also claims the washing machine was still warm when officers arrived. She got that from a false report by Richard Owen. No officer, or anyone else, ever testified the machine was warm (or running).

Since the clothes Meredith was wearing when she was murdered were all found unwashed either on her or in her room, just what would be the purpose of washing her other clothes?

What an excellent opportunity for transfer of Sollecito's DNA to the bra hook. Knox comes along with Sollecito's DNA on her hands, shuffles her flat mates stuff along on the drying rack to make room for hers / takes off stuff that is dry (which is what happens in a shared flat). There is transfer of a trace count of DNA to the bra hook. I am not saying this is definitely the way that DNA transferred, I actually think the likeliest is Sollecito's DNA was on Kercher's hand and then she transferred it to her bra. What is very unlikely is that Sollecito was involved in a bloody fight ripping off a bra, and the only trace of his DNA was on the 'concealed' fastener that he could not have directly touched, and that no DNA or blood was transferred to him and he managed not to stand in any of the blood. So holistically the isolated transfer in the midst of the posited struggle seems unlikely so another source of transfer becomes likely.