Who killed Meredith Kercher? part 23

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's what the PGP actually believe [qimg]http://b2.ifrm.com/253/91/0/e391245//e391245.gif[/qimg]:

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/UojNsnx.jpg[/qimg]

Just like DNA works differently in Italy, so do the laws of physics!:confused:

If the rock were thrown from the inside the glass would have been smashed into the interior side of the outside shutters if they were closed. There should also have been evidence of the rock (or "boulder" for Vixen) hitting the interior side of those shutters. There is no evidence of either. However, the fact that there is a glass shard embedded in the exterior side of the interior shutter shows the rock was thrown from outside when those shutters were closed.

But I'm sure Vixen will twist herself inside out trying to explain this.
 
Just like DNA works differently in Italy, so do the laws of physics!:confused:

If the rock were thrown from the inside the glass would have been smashed into the interior side of the outside shutters if they were closed. There should also have been evidence of the rock (or "boulder" for Vixen) hitting the interior side of those shutters. There is no evidence of either. However, the fact that there is a glass shard embedded in the exterior side of the interior shutter shows the rock was thrown from outside when those shutters were closed.[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/716695840b4757324f.png[/qimg]

But I'm sure Vixen will twist herself inside out trying to explain this.


No - to be fair, the pro-staging belief involving the rock used from within the room is compatible with a mark and glass fragment on the exterior side of the interior shutter. That's because the scenario entails the left-hand window being swung open into the room, along with the left-hand interior shutter. And the rock is then moved or thrown against the normally-exterior-facing surface of the glass pane (which, with the window swung open by 90 degrees, means that the rock is moved/thrown from right to left against the glass). If the left-hand interior shutter is being held against the window (in other words, both the left window pane and the left interior shutter are flat against each other at 90 degrees to their closed position), then glass could indeed pass from the window pane to the normally-exterior-facing side of the interior shutter, causing a mark at the same time.

However, there are numerous other deal-breaking problems with this scenario. Most notably, the glass dispersal fragments and the position of the rock are entirely in line with what ballistics theory would suggest for that rock being thrown from the outside against a closed and fixed window and a closed (but unfixed) interior shutter. It's extremely unlikely that Knox or Sollecito (or anyone else, for that matter) would have had the skill or luck to distribute the glass and rock in such a manner.

PS: It bears repeating at this point that the nature of the glass in this case (thin, low-quality single-pane glass) and the size/shape/velocity of the rock would result in no sizeable pieces of glass flying backwards with any significant velocity when the rock went through the window. Small fragments of the glass would propel forward into the room (with higher initial velocity than the rock's impact velocity - explained by conservation of momentum) and larger pieces of the glass would simply drop vertically downwards. This is exactly in line with the evidence at the scene, where several large fragments were on the exterior windowsill (they'd evidently been carefully moved to the side manually - something an intruder might very well do in order to have a clean sill to facilitate entry, but arguably something a "stager" would never have even thought about....). Some extremely small particles of glass would have been thrown backwards (extremely small = less than 1mm in diameter), but we already know that the inept and incompetent crime scene police operatives not only failed to inspect the scrubby ground below Romanelli's window properly (it should have been fingertip-searched and screened through fine sieves), they also - incredibly - used that very piece of ground from Day 1 of the investigation as a place to stand to smoke and make phone calls etc. Keystone Cops.
 
The pro staging belief is exactly what I illustrated and it's beyond stupid.


I agree. But nonetheless it is compatible with a dent and a glass shard embedding in the (normally) exterior face of the left interior shutter.
 
ENSFI Standards apply only to ENFSI members and a criterion for membership is you need to be a stipulated EUROPEAN country.

How do I function on a daily basis? Obviously being an accountant, I am of the same ilk as the Ben Affleck character in the film of the same name ('The Accountant', 2016), which must be, high on the asperger scale. This shows in that I only warm to prime numbers, otherwise I go into a strop. For example, a locker chosen in whcih to leave my belongings at the British Library must be a three-digit prime number.

Morning starts with a handful of red or black grapes (for their phenol content, supposedly good for kidney health; did you know your kidneys circulate your entire blood stream forty times a day), tomato juice with either two slices of lemon or a dash of Worcester sauce and salt, an orange or clementine, (to get the daily Vitamin C out of the way), a handful of mixed roast nuts, a calcium tablet with vitamin D, methylated vitamin B12 and B2 and Methylated follate to deal with the MTHFR mutation discovered in my DNA. DNA haplotype U5 is wonderful in the prime number respect, although my subclade U5a2a, is ahem, well, two is a wonderful number, too. A cafetiere of coffee, which must be arabica, preferably either Kenyan or Columbian, although robusta is great for espresso, preferably Lavassa is imbibed mornings only.

Then I will walk to work, exactly 5,237 steps, in precisely 27.5 minutes in a leafy conservation area with near zero traffic

Work will be memorising pi to 193 digits in quiet moments, liaising with numerous persons, preparing endless spreadsheets, computing figures and designing fancy pivot tables, whilst juggling seven (!) balls in the air.

Lunch is usually a smoked salmon bagel with cream cheese, a squeeze of lemon and a peck of black pepper, or leftovers from a previous evening or weekend meal.

Afternoon will be tea, together the correct ritual of using loose leaf top drawer quality only (no teabags nonsense) with the correct paraphenalia, such as a dainty bone china jug for the milk and proper tea cup, saucer and teaspoons, which ought to be shared by at least two persons, as in, 'tea for two'. If there are any social or networking functions, I hover by the door, ready to escape when no-one is looking.

Evenings will involve a freshly cooked meal usually involving items from the following group: onions, garlic, green pepper, quorn, kidney beans, lentils, peas, new potatoes, fresh salmon or other choice fish (but not prawns, due to an unpleasant allergy), pasta, rice, soup and to satisfy my ancient hunter-gatherer, pre-farmer DNA, a choice cut of sirloin steak now and again. Not all of them all at once. (Did you know, peas are fruit, grapes are berries and peanuts are legumes, not nuts?) If any wine is drunk, it must be high end and of a grape of a certain year. Thankfully, as this tends to be expensive, I don't get to drink a lot, mainly as I believe it to be a waste of money.

Whenever I go on a flight, I must have a proper airline meal and a glass of bubbly. This dates back to when I had a fear of flying. Now I have grown to enjoy it. However, the bubbly remains a fond habit, although it is no longer free.

In my spare time, like the Ben Affleck's character, I spend my time obsessively hunting down money launderers and tax dodgers and have a penchant for works of art, chamber music and ballet. As a barely functioning individual, I struggle to draw intricate pencil sketches of St Pancras Station in complex linear detail or compose symphony orchestral music to the level of Nigel Kennedy. Indeed, from my knowledge of how 'European' differs from 'International' it is clear it is a great struggle for me to get through any day...How do I function...?

We-eeeell.

What a royal pain in the rump you must be, Vixen. Maybe it's that MTHFKR mutation in your DNA.

I no longer think you're a woman. You sound exactly like so many of the PGP men who have graced us with their brilliance over the years.

Guess what. I stay up all night, drinking Coke and eating chocolate. Sometimes I get a $4.00 Margarita at Chipotle, and I couldn't complete a Sudoku for all the money in Bill Williams' pockets.

And yet.....I am right, and you are wrong.

Ponder that.
 
I agree. But nonetheless it is compatible with a dent and a glass shard embedding in the (normally) exterior face of the left interior shutter.

I see your point. However, this would have entailed the stager to walk over to the closed window, open it to the 90 degree angle, and then throw the rock at it while standing in front of it.
Why not just throw the rock from the door against the closed window shutter? Amateurs wouldn't think about how glass would fall ,etc.

The broken glass pieces would have fallen directly below it and forward along the wall toward the desk, not forward into the bedroom where it was found on the blue rug by the bed and as far as the bedside table. The only way the glass would have flown that far, and in that direction, would be if it was thrown from outside and into the room.
 
What a royal pain in the rump you must be, Vixen. Maybe it's that MTHFKR mutation in your DNA.

I no longer think you're a woman. You sound exactly like so many of the PGP men who have graced us with their brilliance over the years.

Guess what. I stay up all night, drinking Coke and eating chocolate. Sometimes I get a $4.00 Margarita at Chipotle, and I couldn't complete a Sudoku for all the money in Bill Williams' pockets.

And yet.....I am right, and you are wrong.

Ponder that.

I resemble that remark!
 
Apparently some PGP state that the Conti - Vecchiotti report is no longer relevant, because of alleged criticism of it in the Chieffi CSC panel motivation report. The criticism in the Chieffi motivation report, however, was directed primarily (and wrongly, in terms of both science and law) at the Hellmann court's use of the C - V report, rather than at the report itself. The C - V report stands valid as a report of court-appointed independent experts to the Italian judiciary.

The Marasca CSC panel, in its motivation report finally and definitively acquitting Knox and Sollecito of the murder/rape of Kercher, included positive reference to the C - V report, to other CSC judgments requiring that evidence data meet standards of reliability, the Berti - Berni {officers of RIS [Reparto investigazioni scientifiche / Department of scientific investigation]} DNA profiling report, other DNA expert opinions, and general knowledge of the scientific method.

Here is an excerpt of the Marasca CSC panel motivation report where they reference the C - V report:

Taking into account such considerations {of the need to satisfy CPP Article 192.2, that states that a fact cannot be inferred from circumstantial evidence unless that evidence is serious, precise and consistent} one really cannot see how the results of the genetic analysis – that were performed in violation of the recommendations for the protocols regarding the collection and storage – can be considered endowed of the characteristics of seriousness and preciseness.
And in fact, crystallising the results of tried and tested experience, formed as a result of repeated experimentation and significant statistical findings from experimental data, these rules epitomise the standards for [determining] the reliability of the results of the analysis, whether it is to determine identity, or merely compatibility with a specific genetic profile. Otherwise, no importance can be given to the acquired data, not even as circumstantial evidence (cf. Section 2, n. 2476 of 27/11/2014, dep. 2015, Santangelo, Rv. 261866, on the necessity of correct storage of the material containing genetic profiles, for the purposes of “repeatability” of technical findings capable of extrapolating the genetic profile; repeatability that is, moreover, dependent on the quantity of the trace and the quality of the DNA present on the biological exhibits collected; id. N. 2476/14 cit. Rv. 261867).
In the case in question, it is absolutely certain that those methods were not complied with (cf., among others, ff. 206-207 and the cited requested findings of the expert report Conte-Vecchiotti, ordered by the Perugian Court of Appeal).
Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/
September 07, 2015 Supreme Court Motivation Report
pages 39 - 40
 
Last edited:
Apparently some PGP state that the Conti - Vecchiotti report is no longer relevant, because of alleged criticism of it in the Chieffi CSC panel motivation report. The criticism in the Chieffi motivation report, however, was directed primarily (and wrongly, in terms of both science and law) at the Hellmann court's use of the C - V report, rather than at the report itself. The C - V report stands valid as a report of court-appointed independent experts to the Italian judiciary.

The Marasca CSC panel, in its motivation report finally and definitively acquitting Knox and Sollecito of the murder/rape of Kercher, included positive reference to the C - V report, to other CSC judgments requiring that evidence data meet standards of reliability, the Berti - Berni {officers of RIS [Reparto investigazioni scientifiche / Department of scientific investigation]} DNA profiling report, other DNA expert opinions, and general knowledge of the scientific method.

Here is an excerpt of the Marasca CSC panel motivation report where they reference the C - V report:

Taking into account such considerations {of the need to satisfy CPP Article 192.2, that states that a fact cannot be inferred from circumstantial evidence unless that evidence is serious, precise and consistent} one really cannot see how the results of the genetic analysis – that were performed in violation of the recommendations for the protocols regarding the collection and storage – can be considered endowed of the characteristics of seriousness and preciseness.
And in fact, crystallising the results of tried and tested experience, formed as a result of repeated experimentation and significant statistical findings from experimental data, these rules epitomise the standards for [determining] the reliability of the results of the analysis, whether it is to determine identity, or merely compatibility with a specific genetic profile. Otherwise, no importance can be given to the acquired data, not even as circumstantial evidence (cf. Section 2, n. 2476 of 27/11/2014, dep. 2015, Santangelo, Rv. 261866, on the necessity of correct storage of the material containing genetic profiles, for the purposes of “repeatability” of technical findings capable of extrapolating the genetic profile; repeatability that is, moreover, dependent on the quantity of the trace and the quality of the DNA present on the biological exhibits collected; id. N. 2476/14 cit. Rv. 261867).
In the case in question, it is absolutely certain that those methods were not complied with (cf., among others, ff. 206-207 and the cited requested findings of the expert report Conte-Vecchiotti, ordered by the Perugian Court of Appeal).
Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/
September 07, 2015 Supreme Court Motivation Report
pages 39 - 40


That rather begs the question, doesn't it? Chieffi and Nencini do not accept that any such protocols were broken.
 
Just like DNA works differently in Italy, so do the laws of physics!:confused:

If the rock were thrown from the inside the glass would have been smashed into the interior side of the outside shutters if they were closed. There should also have been evidence of the rock (or "boulder" for Vixen) hitting the interior side of those shutters. There is no evidence of either. However, the fact that there is a glass shard embedded in the exterior side of the interior shutter shows the rock was thrown from outside when those shutters were closed.[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/716695840b4757324f.png[/qimg]

But I'm sure Vixen will twist herself inside out trying to explain this.


Er, let me get this right. You are claiming a 'rock' travelling at 28 mph came in through the shuttered window from 12'4" below, or even from 6'6" from across the car park, with the restriction of a shoulder high railing, in full view of passing traffic...?
 
What a royal pain in the rump you must be, Vixen. Maybe it's that MTHFKR mutation in your DNA.

I no longer think you're a woman. You sound exactly like so many of the PGP men who have graced us with their brilliance over the years.

Guess what. I stay up all night, drinking Coke and eating chocolate. Sometimes I get a $4.00 Margarita at Chipotle, and I couldn't complete a Sudoku for all the money in Bill Williams' pockets.

And yet.....I am right, and you are wrong.

Ponder that.

Chocolate? Did someone say chocolate...?

A Day in the Life of an Imaginary PIP

Awakes to the household sounds of Mom and Dad pottering around getting ready for work. Head pounds, vaguely remembers the night before, hauling himself out of the basement, through the screen door, and then down the porch steps, di Caprio-style, on his stomach, and goodness knows how he managed it, into the car. He had to drive very slowly with one eye shut – the bourbon shots from Dad’s drinks cabinet had given him double vision – managed to get a Big Mac and fries and back home, before the gas ran out.

With one eye, he looks at the time in the bottom right hand corner: 7:20 am and his half-completed tweet under the name ‘@Mad_Dog’ in response to a PGP who’d accused him of not having,’read the court documents’.

‘The kids are innocent!...’ He has written in the most witty way he knows how. He racks his still sleepy brain trying to think of a counter argument and not be levelled with the response, ‘Simpleton!’

But it’s all too much. There are marks on his forehead from where he dropped off to sleep with his head buried on his keyboard, discarded Macdonald wrappers surrounding him and a half eaten pizza slice in the drawer with something green growing on it.

Mom pops her head around the door, ‘There’s some toast and marmalade for you on the breakfast table – ‘

Stops in her tracks. ‘Darling, you look terrible! When is the last time you went out into the sunshine -?’

‘Mom, don’t nag, I am on a valuable mission –‘

‘Son, you are 44 and you used to have such a promising career in the FBI –‘

‘Mom, this is my career: a keyboard warrior. I am protecting truth , justice and, er, the American way from foreigners in a country smaller than the entire state of Californ-i-a. I am helping to make America great again.’

Mom backs out of the room. Dad can be heard hollering in the background, ‘Take out the papers and the trash, or you don’t get no spending cash…’

Our hero blots it all out, until at last the door slams for the last time as everyone else in the house heads for work. Problem with regularly being woken up with just three hour sleep is being unable to give a clever reply to the likes of the PGP without being held up to ridicule.

Browsing, he comes across a tweet, ‘#AmandaKnox accused an innocent man’.

He maximises his Marriott crib sheet page and scrolls down until he gets to PR factoid #101: 'Of course she did, she was interrogated 53 hours without sleep, food or drink, was slapped about the head by police tag teams of twelve, who changed every hour on the hour, especially dispatched from the Rome elite torture squads, designed to breakdown homely virginal Apple-Pie American girls.’

A notification flashes up onscreen: an email has arrived from ‘Supertanker HQ’ marked, ‘Top Secret’ ‘For Your Eyes Only’. Our hero feels a rush of adrenaline race through his body. They are instructions for the day:

• ‘Damage limitation: There is a positive review for John Follain’s book – all warriors to down mark it and write arguments against in the comments section.

• A few more glowing reviews for ‘Waiting to be Heard’ needed.

• A few more guilters and haters spotted.

• Action plan: Agent 007 to investigate their backgrounds and expose them.

• Agent Zit to write wordpress article defaming hater ‘Harry Rag'. Oh, and keep up the "What a POS Nick Pisa is" twitter campaign.'

It’s all in a day’s work for our hero. He sends a DM to Agent 007 who lives in New Zealand and calls herself @Moana. Her avatar is a fierce-looking seagxxxx albatross, and chuckles to himself. ‘That’ll wind’em up.’

A good thing about the folks waking him up early, means he gets to have an egg and sausage McMuffin before they stop serving breakfast. With a bit of luck, his welfare check will turn up in the post soon. He climbs out of the basement, wading through the empty wrappers and coke tins, to keep watch for the postman. He keeps forgetting to bow before the picture of the kids he has pinned up on his door.

‘Who turned on the sun,’ he blinks, as he stumbles out of the darkness. Aha! He’s got it. That’s what he’ll respond to that hater. ‘Rudy did it alone!’ Heh.


Onwards and upwards.
 
Last edited:
That rather begs the question, doesn't it? Chieffi and Nencini do not accept that any such protocols were broken.

Sigh.

Nencini said he was forced to agree with the defence that international protocols were not followed. The cite has been posted to this thread three times in the past week. Yet you just soldier on......
 
Sigh.

Nencini said he was forced to agree with the defence that international protocols were not followed. The cite has been posted to this thread three times in the past week. Yet you just soldier on......

The Nencini, Chieffi, Hellmann, and Massei motivation reports are of historical interest and reviewable by a potential Italian revision court (which by Italian procedural law, can only revise convictions) or by the ECHR in a case alleging violations of the European Convention on Human Rights relating to those documents.

Thus, whether the Nencini MR recognized that international protocols were not followed is not as relevant as the fact that the Marasca CSC panel MR, in its final and definitive acquittal, adopted, based upon the position of the Conti - Vecchiotti report, other reports (including the Berti - Berni report) and expert opinions, and prior CSC judgments, that international standards or protocols for the repeatability and reliability of scientific data introduced into evidence must be followed for a fact to be inferred from that data.

ETA: As an imperfect analogy, the Nencini motivation report has the same status in Italy and the Council of Europe States as the US Supreme Court's Dred Scott opinion (1857) has in the US. Historical reviews can reveal the errors and arbitrary reasoning in such judgments, and how they compare to current law, or how they reflect the biases of their authors and times, but they have been supplanted as law. The Dred Scott decision was supplanted by the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the US Constitution; the Nencini decision by the Marasca CSC panel final and definitive acquittal. A difference is that the ECHR of the Council of Europe can use the Nencini motivation report as evidence in any case brought by Knox or Sollecito alleging that Italy violated rights listed in the European Convention of Human Rights in their trials.
 
Last edited:
The Nencini, Chieffi, Hellmann, and Massei motivation reports are of historical interest and reviewable by a potential Italian revision court (which by Italian procedural law, can only revise convictions) or by the ECHR in a case alleging violations of the European Convention on Human Rights relating to those documents.

Thus, whether the Nencini MR recognized that international protocols were not followed is not as relevant as the fact that the Marasca CSC panel MR, in its final and definitive acquittal, adopted, based upon the position of the Conti - Vecchiotti report, other reports (including the Berti - Berni report) and expert opinions, and prior CSC judgments, that international standards or protocols for the repeatability and reliability of scientific data introduced into evidence must be followed for a fact to be inferred from that data.


No, the Vecchiotti - Conti report remains expunged, as Chieffi threw it out and it has never been remitted back to a merits court (second instance) for review and reinstalment.

Marasca may have erroneously endorsed the V&C report, but it has no legal status as they have no jurisdiction to assess the merits of evidence.
 
"Expungment" legal definition:

Expungement is the process of legally destroying, obliterating or striking out records or information in files, computers and other depositories relating to criminal charges. State laws, which vary by state, govern the expungement of criminal records. The records cannot be accessed for general law enforcement or civil use. An expunged record may usually not be considered by any private or public entity in employment matters, certification, licensing, revocation of certification or licensure, or registration. However, some states allow expunged records to be accessed for employment or licensing in certain sensitive positions, such as law enforcement or work involving children or elderly persons.

Source: http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-law-and-procedure-expungement/

In the common law legal system, an expungement proceeding is a type of lawsuit in which a first time offender of a prior criminal conviction seeks that the records of that earlier process be sealed, making the records unavailable through the state or Federal repositories. If successful, the records are said to be "expunged". Black's Law Dictionary defines "expungement of record" as the "Process by which record of criminal conviction is destroyed or sealed from the state or Federal repository."[1] While expungement deals with an underlying criminal record, it is a civil action in which the subject is the petitioner or plaintiff asking a court to declare that the records be expunged.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expungement

Obviously, no Italian court has "expunged" any report from any expert.

In Italy, revision trials are used to revise (reverse) wrongful convictions; such revisions produce acquittals or other dismissals.
 
And to clear up - once more - the misunderstanding by some that the CSC may not legally consider evidence - what the CSC may legally do, according to CPP Article 606.1E, is evaluate, based upon an appeal, whether "the grounds of the judgment {which necessarily includes the evidence and the way the evidence was evaluated} are lacking, contradictory or manifestly illogical, when the defect results from the text of the appealed decision or from other documents of the proceedings specified in the arguments for the appeal to the CSC".
 
No, the Vecchiotti - Conti report remains expunged, as Chieffi threw it out and it has never been remitted back to a merits court (second instance) for review and reinstalment.

Marasca may have erroneously endorsed the V&C report, but it has no legal status as they have no jurisdiction to assess the merits of evidence.

Chieffi 2013 ruled only on the legal direction Hellmann gave (or didn't give) to Vecchiotti.

As you say, the ISC does not rule on the merits of the evidence. You contradict yourself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom