NotEvenWrong
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2014
- Messages
- 910
Lmao I called it. Took a whole 16 minutes.
Who killed Meredith Kercher? part 23
- Thread starter LondonJohn
- Start date
- Status
Lmao I called it. Took a whole 16 minutes.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
It was your arguments to which I was referring, not mine. But you know that of course, didn't you
Same to you with brass knobs on.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
NotEvenWrong
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2014
- Messages
- 910
What the Christ hell is wrong with you?
Europe consists of 50 countries. 50 is more than one. Therefore a EUROPEAN standard is an INTERNATIONAL standard.
Clear now? (wtf of course it's not. How do you function on a daily basis?)
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
No. You have not resolved your claim that Italy and the UK are the same nation.
From the Italian Constitution (translation on the website of the Italian Senate):
Art. 10
The Italian legal system conforms to the generally recognised principles of international law.The legal status of foreigners is regulated by law in conformity with international provisions and treaties.
A foreigner who, in his home country, is denied the actual exercise of the democratic freedoms guaranteed by the Italian constitution shall be entitled to the right of asylum under the conditions established by law.
A foreigner may not be extradited for a political offence.
____
In Italy, "international law" is understood to include the laws generated by European and other international organizations to which Italy belongs, such as the European Union (Court of Justice of the European Union) and the Council of Europe (European Court of Human Rights).
For example, the Italian Supreme Constitutional Court has mandated, under its judgment Number 113 of 2011, that a revision trial may be requested when it is necessary to reopen proceedings in order to comply with a final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), although that provision is not explicit in CPP Article 630.
The principle relevant to the denial by the prosecution of a copy of the raw DNA data to the defense for its examination is that of "equality of arms" under ECHR case-law, under Article 6 - right to a fair trial - of the European Convention of Human Rights, which means that in an adversarial trial, the prosecution must allow access for examination by the defense of all the data gathered by the police and prosecution which forms the basis of the evidence.
Here are the principles of "adversarial trial" and "equality of arms" expressed in the Italian Constitution:
Art. 111
Jurisdiction is implemented through due process regulated by law.
All court trials are conducted with adversary proceedings and the parties are entitled to equal conditions before an impartial judge in third party position.
The law provides for the reasonable duration of trials.
In criminal law trials, the law provides that the alleged offender shall be promptly informed confidentially of the nature and reasons for the charges that are brought and shall have adequate time and conditions to prepare a defence.
The defendant shall have the right to cross-examine or to have cross-examined before a judge the persons making accusations and to summon and examine persons for the defence in the same conditions as the prosecution, as well as the right to produce all other evidence in favour of the defence.
The defendant is entitled to the assistance of an interpreter in
the case that he or she does not speak or understand the language in which the court proceedings are conducted.
In criminal law proceedings, the formation of evidence is based on the principle of adversary hearings.
The guilt of the defendant cannot be established on the basis of statements by persons who, out of their own free choice, have always voluntarily avoided undergoing cross-examination by the defendant or the defence counsel.
The law regulates the cases in which the formation of evidence does not occur in an adversary proceeding with the consent of the defendant or owing to reasons of ascertained objective impossibility or proven illicit conduct.
All judicial decisions shall include a statement of reasons.
Appeals to the Court of Cassation in cases of violations of the law are always allowed against sentences and against measures affecting personal freedom pronounced by ordinary and special courts. This rule can only be waived in cases of sentences by military tribunals in time of war.
Appeals to the Court of Cassation against decisions of the Council of State and the Court of Accounts are permitted only for reasons of jurisdiction.
Art. 10
The Italian legal system conforms to the generally recognised principles of international law.The legal status of foreigners is regulated by law in conformity with international provisions and treaties.
A foreigner who, in his home country, is denied the actual exercise of the democratic freedoms guaranteed by the Italian constitution shall be entitled to the right of asylum under the conditions established by law.
A foreigner may not be extradited for a political offence.
____
In Italy, "international law" is understood to include the laws generated by European and other international organizations to which Italy belongs, such as the European Union (Court of Justice of the European Union) and the Council of Europe (European Court of Human Rights).
For example, the Italian Supreme Constitutional Court has mandated, under its judgment Number 113 of 2011, that a revision trial may be requested when it is necessary to reopen proceedings in order to comply with a final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), although that provision is not explicit in CPP Article 630.
The principle relevant to the denial by the prosecution of a copy of the raw DNA data to the defense for its examination is that of "equality of arms" under ECHR case-law, under Article 6 - right to a fair trial - of the European Convention of Human Rights, which means that in an adversarial trial, the prosecution must allow access for examination by the defense of all the data gathered by the police and prosecution which forms the basis of the evidence.
Here are the principles of "adversarial trial" and "equality of arms" expressed in the Italian Constitution:
Art. 111
Jurisdiction is implemented through due process regulated by law.
All court trials are conducted with adversary proceedings and the parties are entitled to equal conditions before an impartial judge in third party position.
The law provides for the reasonable duration of trials.
In criminal law trials, the law provides that the alleged offender shall be promptly informed confidentially of the nature and reasons for the charges that are brought and shall have adequate time and conditions to prepare a defence.
The defendant shall have the right to cross-examine or to have cross-examined before a judge the persons making accusations and to summon and examine persons for the defence in the same conditions as the prosecution, as well as the right to produce all other evidence in favour of the defence.
The defendant is entitled to the assistance of an interpreter in
the case that he or she does not speak or understand the language in which the court proceedings are conducted.
In criminal law proceedings, the formation of evidence is based on the principle of adversary hearings.
The guilt of the defendant cannot be established on the basis of statements by persons who, out of their own free choice, have always voluntarily avoided undergoing cross-examination by the defendant or the defence counsel.
The law regulates the cases in which the formation of evidence does not occur in an adversary proceeding with the consent of the defendant or owing to reasons of ascertained objective impossibility or proven illicit conduct.
All judicial decisions shall include a statement of reasons.
Appeals to the Court of Cassation in cases of violations of the law are always allowed against sentences and against measures affecting personal freedom pronounced by ordinary and special courts. This rule can only be waived in cases of sentences by military tribunals in time of war.
Appeals to the Court of Cassation against decisions of the Council of State and the Court of Accounts are permitted only for reasons of jurisdiction.
Last edited:
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
Is there really a poster to this thread who believes that a European agency which sets forensic protocols, means that these are not "international" protocols?
Has Westminster ceded political authority to Rome? Or has both signed on to the European version of forensic protocols?
For heaven's sake, even Judge Nencini, one of the convicting judges, agreed with the defence claim that Stefanoni had not followed international protocols. I've posted the cite twice in the last week.....
..... and the offended poster is still trying to argue that Europe is not an international body, comprised of sovereign nation states?
Yes folks, this is what passes for guilter logic, when all one does is reads the nutjob websites and the fake wiki.
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
It is nice to see that you have the capacity to admit to a mistake. This is a good start.
Now - if you can provide a citation to ANYONE who is a peer-reviewed, forensic-DNA expert who agrees with Stefanoni's work and results......
So far you simply named Prof Novelli, the prosecution's expert who testified in Sept 2011. In that testimony, as later summarized by the 2013/4 Nencini court, Novelli conceded that Stefanoni did not meet international standards in that she did not do multiple amplifications of the samples, therefore the defence was right to contend that Stefanoni's results were unreliable.
And all that was Judge Nencini simply summarizing/concluding what he'd read in Novelli's trial testimony. However, despite this, Nencini convicted anyway - a verdict which the Italian Supreme Court reversed in 2015. They acquitted the pair (exonerating them) for the mass of contradictions Nencini had in his report.....
........ which is the very subject we are discussing. Even the prosecution and victim's experts agreed that Stefanoni's results had not met the international standards for reliability when only doing one amplification.
..... and just to come full circle, I would never have known this if you had not (wrongly) cited Novelli as being a peer-reviewed (which he is) forensic-DNA expert (which he is) who stood by Stefanoni's work (which he didn't).
You have shown the ability to admit to mistakes which is rare on these threads. It's probably time you reprised the effort with the question which has been asked of you for weeks now:
Name one peer-reviewed forensic-DNA expert who supports Stefanoni's work? (Please forget the excuse you once offered that she's only a technician with allegiance only to the police, because if that is true - why did you then offer Prof. Novelli as an answer? It sounds like you're simply making things up as you go.)
The issue not brought forward with the subject of whether or not "international protocols" were followed is why they must be followed under Italian law for the purposes of generating valid evidence.
CPP Article 192.2, Evaluation of evidence, states:
The existence of a fact cannot be inferred from circumstantial evidence unless such evidence is serious, precise and consistent.
____
DNA profiles not obtained in accordance with the standards set by the international scientific community, standards based upon a long history of empirical research and available in the scientific literature as well as certain forensic science organizations, cannot satisfy the requirements of CPP Article 192.2 to constitute serious, precise and consistent evidence.
The alleged DNA profile of Meredith Kercher allegedly found on the blade of the knife in Raffaele Sollecito's kitchen does not satisfy CPP Art. 192.2 because it was obtained without regard to international protocols for LCN DNA or any validation of the methods used by the forensic worker, P. Stefanoni.
There are several other inconsistencies of the knife blade as evidence which show that, in accordance with CPP Art. 192.2, it may not be inferred to be the murder weapon: no blood was detected on the blade visually or by the forensic tests applied; no tissue was detected on the blade by any objective test; it is the wrong size compared to the wounds on Kercher; it had been subjected to only casual washing, as shown by the presence of starch from plants on the blade; there was no evidence that the knife was ever taken from Sollecito's apartment (except when it was seized by the police).
Therefore, the alleged DNA profile of Kercher allegedly found on the blade cannot be used to infer the existence of a fact - such as that the knife blade from Sollecito's kitchen ever came into contact with Meredith Kercher.
Numbers as made a good summary of the problems with the knife/DNA evidence. In addition to the issues highlighted in the post, there are other problems with the knife. An issue which is overlooked is that during the interrogations neither Amanda or Raffaele were accused of stabbing Meredith and the statements prepared for Amanda and Raffaele made no mention of Amanda and Raffaele stabbing Meredith. The two statements prepared by the police made for Amanda to sign no mention of a knife being used in Meredith’s murder. How is this discrepancy explained if Amanda or Raffaele stabbed Meredith? The defence teams of Amanda and Raffaele had no objection to the knife being opened which indicated they had not used the knife and there was no blood between where the handle joins the blade. The prosecution on the other hand did not want the knife opened which indicated the prosecution knew there was blood where the handle joined the blade.
The knife has no credibility and is full of holes. If the police/prosecution have a slam dunk case and solid evidence, you should never have to resort to using evidence with no credibility. I will use an example to illustrate this. A man has been arrested for breaking into a house, raping and battering the occupant to death. The police have the following evidence against the suspect :-
His DNA is all over the crime scene.
He leaves blood handprints, footprints and fingerprints at the scene.
The DNA of the suspect is found on the victim’s private parts.
The blood of the victim is found on the clothing and in the home of the suspect.
The police find a metal bar in the home of the suspect with the victims blood and DNA on it.
The suspects’ DNA is found under the fingernails of the victim. The suspect has scratches on his face.
There is clear CCTV of the suspect running away from the scene covered in blood.
The police check the mobile phone of the suspect and found photos of the victim.
The police check the computer of the suspect and find a written account of the murder that only the murderer could know.
In my scenario the police/prosecution have a mountain of solid evidence and a slam dunk case. Imagine the police use the testimony of someone who says he saw the suspect running away from the scene. The only problem is that the witness is blind. The testimony of the witness obviously has no credibility. Would people not find it strange that the prosecution would need to use evidence with no credibility when they have a mountain of solid and credible evidence at their disposal?
If the prosecution had a mountain of solid, credible and reliable evidence against Amanda and Raffaele and a strong case, why did the prosecution have to resort to using totally lacking in credibility and full of holes such as the knife? The fact the prosecution had to resort to using evidence with no credibility indicates the prosecution had such a lack of credible and reliable evidence and a weak case, they were forced to use evidence with no credibility. How is this explained if the prosecution had a strong case?
Last edited:
I believe you meant to write (my additions in { }):
The defence teams of Amanda and Raffaele {requested that} the knife {be} opened which indicated they had not used the knife {to murder Meredith} and {that therefore they knew that} there was no blood between {the tang and the handle} where the handle joins the blade. The prosecution on the other hand did not want the knife opened which indicated the prosecution {likewise} knew {that} there was {NO} blood {between tang and the handle} where the handle joined the blade.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
You are beginning to look like a one-trick pony. All you have is the Tennessee Two Step.
Maybe this document from the UK's Crown Prosecution Service will help in understanding what is required for LCN DNA to be acceptable for use in a criminal case, and thus why the alleged DNA profile of Kercher that Stefanoni claimed present on the knife blade is worthless as evidence. Note that VALIDATION and ACCREDITATION are key concepts, as well as meeting of ENSFI and SWGDAM guidelines.
Source: https://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/lcn_testing_annex_b.html
Low Copy Number DNA testing in the Criminal Justice System
Annex B - Validation and accreditation of the technique
Two principal Forensic Science Service papers about LCN have been published in peer-reviewed journals.
Further extensive validation covering all the stages of the technique and interpretation of results includes eleven more papers, forty-three internal FSS Research Reports, contributions to several textbooks and a European collaborative exercise.
A list of the externally published FSS papers, internal research reports produced and validation that was carried out to support all the stages of the LCN process is available from FSS Headquarters on request.
Further work is not 'publishable' in scientific journals since it will no longer be novel – eg; once Dolly the sheep had been cloned, the next cloned sheep was no longer news!
The Custodian of the NDNAD sets the standards for DNA profiles that are acceptable for adding to the NDNAD. LCN has been accepted by the Custodian for this purpose since 2002, following successful completion of proficiency tests.
In 2007, an external review was commissioned by an ACPO chaired working group. The review accepted that the FSS LCN method was validated according to the processes that were in force within the FSS at the time, although currently not against any internationally or nationally recognised technical standard.
The FSS processes have been accredited for LCN to ISO17025 by UKAS (www.ukas.com) since 2001 and ISO9001 by BSI since 2005. Information about these standards can be obtained from (www.iso.org).
The guidelines set by the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENSFI) and the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis methods (SWGDAM) have been met.
A collaborative study with other European forensic laboratories and the US Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory reported that LCN compared favourably against other methods for testing poor quality samples: (www.cstl.nist.gov/biotech/strbase/pub_pres/EDNAP_degradedDNAstudy.pdf)
For those wishing further technical information, here are some sources:
https://www.promega.com/resources/p...c-issues-with-analysis-of-low-amounts-of-dna/
Quote from the above paper:
Every lab faces samples with low amounts of DNA. Laboratories and DNA analysts need to choose whether or not to attempt an “enhanced interrogation technique” such as increasing the cycle number, desalting samples or higher CE injection. If such an approach is taken, validation studies need to be performed to develop appropriate interpretation guidelines and to assess the degree of variation that can be expected when analyzing low amounts of DNA.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20457035
Quote from the above abstract:
The characteristics of STR profiles produced from approximately 1 ng starting template using the AMPFlSTR SGM Plus multiplex and 28 PCR cycles, are well documented. However, the analysis of samples perceived as low in starting template (less than 100 pg), and referred to as low template DNA (LTDNA), can require a test of higher sensitivity in order to achieve successful results. One way of increasing this sensitivity is to increase the number of PCR amplification cycles from 28 to 34. This type of analysis has become known as low copy number, or LCN, DNA profiling. Amplification of LTDNA under LCN conditions can result in increased incidents of profile characteristics such as allelic 'drop-in' and allelic 'drop-out'. Adopting a testing regime which includes duplicate analysis, and maintaining a laboratory environment of stringent and monitored cleanliness, enables the scientist to identify and control these phenomena for a reliable interpretation of the DNA profiling results. A recent court ruling has questioned the reliability of LCN analysis and commented on the paucity of publications surrounding the validation of the technique. We present data for the LCN validation undertaken in our laboratory, and describe the guidelines and working practices we have developed for the analysis and interpretation of profiles generated after LCN profiling. This study augments the published record relating to LCN validation and should act as a useful guide for other laboratories who are considering implementing LCN profiling.
___
Where are P. Stefanoni's validation studies, duplicate analysis, and verification and monitoring of strict contamination control ("cleanliness")? Not presented, and apparently never done, so there was no valid LCN DNA profile evidence in the Knox - Sollecito case.
Source: https://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/lcn_testing_annex_b.html
Low Copy Number DNA testing in the Criminal Justice System
Annex B - Validation and accreditation of the technique
Two principal Forensic Science Service papers about LCN have been published in peer-reviewed journals.
Further extensive validation covering all the stages of the technique and interpretation of results includes eleven more papers, forty-three internal FSS Research Reports, contributions to several textbooks and a European collaborative exercise.
A list of the externally published FSS papers, internal research reports produced and validation that was carried out to support all the stages of the LCN process is available from FSS Headquarters on request.
Further work is not 'publishable' in scientific journals since it will no longer be novel – eg; once Dolly the sheep had been cloned, the next cloned sheep was no longer news!
The Custodian of the NDNAD sets the standards for DNA profiles that are acceptable for adding to the NDNAD. LCN has been accepted by the Custodian for this purpose since 2002, following successful completion of proficiency tests.
In 2007, an external review was commissioned by an ACPO chaired working group. The review accepted that the FSS LCN method was validated according to the processes that were in force within the FSS at the time, although currently not against any internationally or nationally recognised technical standard.
The FSS processes have been accredited for LCN to ISO17025 by UKAS (www.ukas.com) since 2001 and ISO9001 by BSI since 2005. Information about these standards can be obtained from (www.iso.org).
The guidelines set by the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENSFI) and the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis methods (SWGDAM) have been met.
A collaborative study with other European forensic laboratories and the US Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory reported that LCN compared favourably against other methods for testing poor quality samples: (www.cstl.nist.gov/biotech/strbase/pub_pres/EDNAP_degradedDNAstudy.pdf)
For those wishing further technical information, here are some sources:
https://www.promega.com/resources/p...c-issues-with-analysis-of-low-amounts-of-dna/
Quote from the above paper:
Every lab faces samples with low amounts of DNA. Laboratories and DNA analysts need to choose whether or not to attempt an “enhanced interrogation technique” such as increasing the cycle number, desalting samples or higher CE injection. If such an approach is taken, validation studies need to be performed to develop appropriate interpretation guidelines and to assess the degree of variation that can be expected when analyzing low amounts of DNA.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20457035
Quote from the above abstract:
The characteristics of STR profiles produced from approximately 1 ng starting template using the AMPFlSTR SGM Plus multiplex and 28 PCR cycles, are well documented. However, the analysis of samples perceived as low in starting template (less than 100 pg), and referred to as low template DNA (LTDNA), can require a test of higher sensitivity in order to achieve successful results. One way of increasing this sensitivity is to increase the number of PCR amplification cycles from 28 to 34. This type of analysis has become known as low copy number, or LCN, DNA profiling. Amplification of LTDNA under LCN conditions can result in increased incidents of profile characteristics such as allelic 'drop-in' and allelic 'drop-out'. Adopting a testing regime which includes duplicate analysis, and maintaining a laboratory environment of stringent and monitored cleanliness, enables the scientist to identify and control these phenomena for a reliable interpretation of the DNA profiling results. A recent court ruling has questioned the reliability of LCN analysis and commented on the paucity of publications surrounding the validation of the technique. We present data for the LCN validation undertaken in our laboratory, and describe the guidelines and working practices we have developed for the analysis and interpretation of profiles generated after LCN profiling. This study augments the published record relating to LCN validation and should act as a useful guide for other laboratories who are considering implementing LCN profiling.
___
Where are P. Stefanoni's validation studies, duplicate analysis, and verification and monitoring of strict contamination control ("cleanliness")? Not presented, and apparently never done, so there was no valid LCN DNA profile evidence in the Knox - Sollecito case.
Last edited:
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
No No No, Numbers!!! Stop throwing all this, like, evidence and science and reason and logic and stuff around! Besides, everyone knows that Italian DNA follows totally different scientific rules. Yes, that's right - DNA science actually works differently in Italy! So none of this is relevant in any conceivable way to Knox and Sollecito in any case! D'uh!
Definitely-a-real-doctor Stefanoni and fine, upstanding PMs Mignini and Comodi could - as any fule kno - do and say just whatever they wanted in respect of the DNA evidence in this case. If they said it, then it was true - and unimpeachably true at that. And not only true, but also scientifically robust and ethical. These were honest, fair people diligently serving the Italian state. They practically stand apart as ethical giants with unparalleled expertise - certainly when set against the rats and snakes who were bribed to give scientific "evidence" for volpe cattiva Amanda and Knifey Raff, both of whom (as a given, d'uh!) cruelly hacked down MezzyWezzyWezBob.
I can't believe you (and everyone else) doesn't understand this. Sheeeeesh.
Thanks for pointing out that in Italy DNA follows different scientific rules.
That's what the guilters have been saying all this time.
But, back to the tedious business of looking at evidence and science and reason and logic, here is another excerpt from a scientific publication on LCN DNA:
4. Discussion
The efficacy of genotyping LCN DNA samples by multiplex PCR of STR loci can be improved by increasing the number of PCR cycles. We propose that 34-cycle PCR is a valuable tool when samples that could not be sufficiently analysed after the standard PCR procedure have to be reanalysed. The potential of this delicate new application of the PCR technology can only show to be an advantage if the analysis is executed under rigorously clean laboratory conditions with proper negative and positive controls and if the guidelines for the evaluation of the profiles are fully taken into account [2].
Finally, in the course of this study, it appeared that reamplification of PCR products from LCN samples with an extra 6 PCR cycles seems to offer an alternative and promising new approach for typing LCN samples in the forensic DNA practice.
References
[1] E.A. Cotton, R.F. Allsop, J.L. Guest, R.R. Frazier, P. Koumi, I.P. Callow, A. Seager, R.L. Sparkes, Validation
of the AMPFlSTR SGM Plus system for use in forensic casework, Forensic Sci. Int. 112 (2000) 151– 161.
[2] P. Gill, J. Whitaker, C. Flaxman, N. Brown, J. Buckleton, An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STRs derived from less than 100 pg of DNA, Forensic Sci. Int. 112 (2000) 17–40.
Source: Efficacy and limits of genotyping low copy number
DNA samples by multiplex PCR of STR loci
A.D. Kloosterman*, P. Kersbergen
Netherlands Forensic Institute, Volmerlaan 17, 2288 GD Rijswijk, The Netherlands
International Congress Series 1239 (2003) 795– 798
https://www.isfg.org/.../31f9316afbc584bc0befd4454d6cd38c4f064f3a....
It's another paper in the scientific literature on LCN DNA profiling that insists on such details as contamination control, use of negative and positive controls, and following the guidelines developed by scientists such as Professor Gill.
Thanks for pointing out that in Italy DNA follows different scientific rules.
That's what the guilters have been saying all this time.
...
The potential of this delicate new application of the PCR technology can only show to be an advantage if the analysis is executed under rigorously clean laboratory conditions with proper negative and positive controls and if the guidelines for the evaluation of the profiles are fully taken into account [2].
Finally, in the course of this study, it appeared that reamplification of PCR products from LCN samples with an extra 6 PCR cycles seems to offer an alternative and promising new approach for typing LCN samples in the forensic DNA practice.
References
[2] P. Gill, J. Whitaker, C. Flaxman, N. Brown, J. Buckleton, An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STRs derived from less than 100 pg of DNA, Forensic Sci. Int. 112 (2000) 17–40.
Source: Efficacy and limits of genotyping low copy number
DNA samples by multiplex PCR of STR loci
A.D. Kloosterman*, P. Kersbergen
Netherlands Forensic Institute, Volmerlaan 17, 2288 GD Rijswijk, The Netherlands
International Congress Series 1239 (2003) 795– 798
https://www.isfg.org/.../31f9316afbc584bc0befd4454d6cd38c4f064f3a....
....
Another important point .... from the guilters' point of view, we have uncovered a massive conspiracy of not merely the Masons and Mafia (which the guilters have already recognized), but also including many prominent DNA scientists and even the Crown Prosecution Service and the UK forensic authorities, dating from 2000 - 2003 and before, even long before Amanda Knox was in college or in Italy, all designed to protect her from Italian justice!
- Status