The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 25

[Vixen]

I DON'T think THEY planted DNA or any evidence. That would suggest a conspiracy. But if you don't think they were out to get Raffaele and Amanda at this point you're naive. They had talked themselves into this crazy idea that Amanda and Raffaele were responsible and their case was crumbling. Like an aphorism they had repeated over and over again they now believed it. (Say enough 'Our Fathers and 'Hail Marys' and you start to believe in the invisible and mythical)

And while I don't believe in conspiracy, I do believe that noble cause corruption is far more prevalent then anyone would like to admit. All it takes is 1 person who believes in the cause more than the process. People rationalize all sorts of actions.

The DNA on the bra clasp is indisputable.

Micheli affirms it is a certain and established fact the pair were present.

Speaking of which tonight is Vappu (St Valburgis) so watch out for witches abroad.

Ave Maria, gratia plena.

 

[Vixen]

Oh and as to why the DNA was on the bra clasp in the first place:

Poor collection procedures as proven by video taken of the evidence collection of the crime scene. Investigators didn't change gloves, didn't care about DNA transfer, and we have a picture of an investigator touching the clasp with dirty gloves (proving the gloves were not changed before touching the clasp; which leads to contamination).

Since Raffaele had been to the cottage multiple times, and even tried to break down that very door the day Meredith's body was discovered, we know his DNA was at the scene and this presence of his DNA was unlinked to the murder. Combine that with poor collection procedures that I described above led to transfer of his DNA to the bra clasp.

In fact, we have proof the clasp was contaminated -- the clasp had Meredith's DNA on it, Raffaele's, AND two other unknown individuals unrelated to the murder.

So think about this logically -- either a) this is PROOF these two other unknown individuals were involved in the murder as well. So Meredith was killed by Rudy, Amanda, Raffaele, and two other people we haven't heard of yet. or b) all of the science we have previously linked to you in this thread is accurate, and "DNA transfer" can happen. So you have to be careful with evidence collection, and this is WHY there are protocols for evidence collection (these protocols aren't just arbitrary and completely useless in practice. They are in place to prevent things like innocent DNA transfer.) And if the science is accurate (it likely is, since it's all been well established, peer reviewed, empirically proven, etc. over the course of decades.) AND we have video and photographic PROOF the evidence collection procedure was faulty, we therefore know the bra clasp was contaminated and had DNA of individuals not involved in the murder.

Thus the bra clasp does not implicate Raffaele -- the same way it doesn't implicate the two other unknown individuals that have their DNA on the clasp.

Does that make sense?

There is no such thing as tertiary transfer, except in very limited experimental conditions of restricted time frames. Even Dr. Gill confirms that secondary transfer of DNA is higly unlikely after 24-hours. In other words, the PIP fairy story of Raff's DNA being transferred from door frame to latex glove to bra clasp - tertiary transfer - is pure lalaland.

B'ain't never gonna happen.

The FACTS are:

1. Raff never touched the door frame. He claimed he shouldered and kicked the door.

2. Stefanoni confirmed she did not touch the metal bit.

Incidentally, the fragments of two other DNA STR's meet EXACTLY the definition of 'background contamination' as they were broken bits of 4-5 alleles typical of the stuff found in household dust.

We also have the fact of the powerful stench of bleach in his apartment that greeted the nostrils of visiting police officers.

 

[Bill Williams]

There is no such thing as tertiary transfer, except in very limited experimental conditions of restricted time frames. Even Dr. Gill confirms that secondary transfer of DNA is higly unlikely after 24-hours. In other words, the PIP fairy story of Raff's DNA being transferred from door frame to latex glove to bra clasp - tertiary transfer - is pure lalaland.

B'ain't never gonna happen.

The FACTS are:

1. Raff never touched the door frame. He claimed he shouldered and kicked the door.

2. Stefanoni confirmed she did not touch the metal bit.

No, she did not. Under oath she said she could neither confirm nor deny touching "the metal bit". Indeed, do you want me to show that pic AGAIN taken by the SP which shows her handling them?

Even in John Follain's book he recounts Stefanani's testamony in this regard.

 

[acbytesla]

The DNA on the bra clasp is indisputable.

No, in fact the DNA on the bra clasp IS absolutely in dispute. You may believe it is indisputable, but just like your belief in God, there are a hell of a lot of us that roll our eyes.

Micheli affirms it is a certain and established fact the pair were present.

I really DON'T care what some judge believes. That does not make it true.

Speaking of which tonight is Vappu (St Valburgis) so watch out for witches abroad.

Ave Maria, gratia plena.

I don't believe in witches any more than I do astrology or God.

 

[acbytesla]

There is no such thing as tertiary transfer, except in very limited experimental conditions of restricted time frames. Even Dr. Gill confirms that secondary transfer of DNA is higly unlikely after 24-hours. In other words, the PIP fairy story of Raff's DNA being transferred from door frame to latex glove to bra clasp - tertiary transfer - is pure lalaland.

B'ain't never gonna happen.

The FACTS are:

1. Raff never touched the door frame. He claimed he shouldered and kicked the door.

2. Stefanoni confirmed she did not touch the metal bit.

Incidentally, the fragments of two other DNA STR's meet EXACTLY the definition of 'background contamination' as they were broken bits of 4-5 alleles typical of the stuff found in household dust.

We also have the fact of the powerful stench of bleach in his apartment that greeted the nostrils of visiting police officers.

There you go making declarations about DNA and what is factual. Sorry, no one considers you to be an expert on DNA. And just because Raff said he didn't touch the door frame does not mean he didn't do it. He very well may have just misrembered. People are terrible witnesses over that kind of stuff.

 

[Stacyhs]

Vixen;11819758]

There is no such thing as tertiary transfer, except in very limited experimental conditions of restricted time frames. Even Dr. Gill confirms that secondary transfer of DNA is higly unlikely after 24-hours. In other words, the PIP fairy story of Raff's DNA being transferred from door frame to latex glove to bra clasp - tertiary transfer - is pure lalaland.
B'ain't never gonna happen.

LOL! Tertiary transfer is a fact. I know you'd like to dismiss the evidence due to "very limited experimental conditions in restricted time frames" because it completely undermines your claim. But the FACT is; the study proved it happens.

But the quantitation results indicated that the amount of DNA present in the samples
was adequate to achieve a full profile by the old standards in at
least three of the tertiary transfer events. In addition these settings
are the in-house validated standard routine analysis method found
to be best suited for the kit and currently used on all case samples
analyzed. Therefore this proves that this transfer scenario could be
possible in current routine case analysis.

From the conclusion of the paper:

Therefore we were more
concerned with the question – is it reasonable that secondary or
tertiary transfer may occur via gloves, or is it impossible? Our work
clearly demonstrates the former to be true.

(Secondary and subsequent DNA transfer during criminal investigation. Fonnelop, Egeland, Gill DNA Transfer, pg 6)

The FACTS are:

1. Raff never touched the door frame. He claimed he shouldered and kicked the door.

Oh, come on. He never said he didn't touch the door or frame with his hands, either. It's perfectly logical that he did touch the metal door handle when attempting to open the door. The study cited above also states that metal transfers DNA to latex gloves easily. RS grasps door handle and deposits his DNA. The SP, wearing latex gloves, grasp door handle. They then touch the bra hook.

2. Stefanoni confirmed she did not touch the metal bit.

As already stated by Bill Williams, she did not say any such thing and the police video clearly shows the hook being touched by the dirty latex glove.

We also have the fact of the powerful stench of bleach in his apartment that greeted the nostrils of visiting police officers.

Really? What bleach did they use? The one and a half bottles of ACE bleach found in Raff's apartment that the maid said were there before the murder? What they were smelling was the Lysoform used by the maid when she cleaned the apartment the afternoon before.
Was it ever demonstrated that Finzi could even tell the difference between bleach and lysoform? Hint: no.

 

[Stacyhs]

There you go making declarations about DNA and what is factual. Sorry, no one considers you to be an expert on DNA. And just because Raff said he didn't touch the door frame does not mean he didn't do it. He very well may have just misrembered. People are terrible witnesses over that kind of stuff.

I don't believe he ever said he did not touch it. Vixen wants us to infer that he didn't because he doesn't mention touching the door frame in his description of trying to force the door down with his shoulder and kicking it. Why would he? Touching the door frame would, in no way, have an impact on his shouldering and kicking the door.

 

[TruthCalls]

There are many people who believe that this is exactly what the police did. Planted evidence incriminatibe Raffaele.

Sticking with **evidence** though, that would mean that the cops also planted evidence against three other unidentified men. Why would they have done that, esp. if at the end of the day they were neither interested that this potentially implicated three others, nor that it then was heavily suggestive of contamination?

Best not to pursue either of those two possibilities, because as even convicting Judge Nencini wrote, the point was that Raffaele's DNA had been found.

Ok, everyone, and a one, and a two...... suspect centric!

One of the many questions I posed to Vixen that was never answered was what were the police doing spraying Luminol in the cottage 46 days after the initial investigation and spraying it where they had already located blood. I tend to believe they were absolutely desperate to find something, anything that could tie Amanda and/or Raffaele to the crime. They rushed to judgement, boldly proclaiming the case closed and they did so without even consulting forensic evidence. Then, when they get the evidence back they realize it's all pointing to someone else and none of the three they jailed. Once they decided they weren't willing to admit they had things wrong, they were forced to rely on a forensic version of a Hail Mary. And even then, they had to lie about the Luminol traces and ignore the numerous obvious signs of contamination on the clasp.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't believe he ever said he did not touch it. Vixen wants us to infer that he didn't because he doesn't mention touching the door frame in his description of trying to force the door down with his shoulder and kicking it. Why would he? Touching the door frame would, in no way, have an impact on his shouldering and kicking the door.

Makes sense. But I find it funny to think even if Raffaele thought he didn't touch it that he really could know for sure. There they are, thinking all kinds of things about Meredith and a few hours later, days later or a few years later being able to definitively say what you did with your hands? C'mon, get real.

Vixen is so so desperate to paint the pair as guilty that she is unable to be reasonable or logical. Time and time again she makes ABSOLUTE statements about the case that are absurd. I don't know if Raffaele touched the door frame or if the transfer happened on some other surface. Or maybe it happened in Stefanoni's lab.

I do know there really is nothing else on Raffaele, just as there is nothing else on Amanda.
If all there was on Rudy was his DNA profile on the bra clasp I would doubt his guilt.

Considering that DNA from 2 other men was found on the bra clasp and it had been unsecure for 46 days is it really reasonable to not consider it as tainted?

 

[Stacyhs]

Makes sense. But I find it funny to think even if Raffaele thought he didn't touch it that he really could know for sure. There they are, thinking all kinds of things about Meredith and a few hours later, days later or a few years later being able to definitively say what you did with your hands? C'mon, get real.

Vixen is so so desperate to paint the pair as guilty that she is unable to be reasonable or logical. Time and time again she makes ABSOLUTE statements about the case that are absurd. I don't know if Raffaele touched the door frame or if the transfer happened on some other surface. Or maybe it happened in Stefanoni's lab.

I do know there really is nothing else on Raffaele, just as there is nothing else on Amanda.
If all there was on Rudy was his DNA profile on the bra clasp I would doubt his guilt.

Considering that DNA from 2 other men was found on the bra clasp and it had been unsecure for 46 days is it really reasonable to not consider it as tainted?

No, which is why all the forensic experts, aside from the least educated in the subject/works for the police Stefanoni, say it is unreliable. I've asked many PGP on several occasions to explain just how that DNA from 2 other men got on that bra hook. Not one has given a reasonable, much less a scientifically sound, explanation.

 

[Stacyhs]

One of the many questions I posed to Vixen that was never answered was what were the police doing spraying Luminol in the cottage 46 days after the initial investigation and spraying it where they had already located blood. I tend to believe they were absolutely desperate to find something, anything that could tie Amanda and/or Raffaele to the crime. They rushed to judgement, boldly proclaiming the case closed and they did so without even consulting forensic evidence. Then, when they get the evidence back they realize it's all pointing to someone else and none of the three they jailed. Once they decided they weren't willing to admit they had things wrong, they were forced to rely on a forensic version of a Hail Mary. And even then, they had to lie about the Luminol traces and ignore the numerous obvious signs of contamination on the clasp.

It's obvious their return trip 6 weeks later was to find something...anything...to tie Raffaele to the murder. Once Raff's tennis shoes were proven by his father and uncle not to be the origin of the bloody shoeprints, the police had to find some way to inculpate him. After all, he was Amanda's alibi and if they could not prove he was involved in the crime, there was no reason to believe what he said wasn't true.
But I don't think they were trying to frame him. They actually believed he was involved and, therefore, they were going to prove it.

 

[acbytesla]

No, which is why all the forensic experts, aside from the least educated in the subject/works for the police Stefanoni, say it is unreliable. I've asked many PGP on several occasions to explain just how that DNA from 2 other men got on that bra hook. Not one has given a reasonable, much less a scientifically sound, explanation.

For me the worst part of the PGP's argument is the unwillingness to view each piece of evidence objectively as opposed to just believing the pair are guilty and working backwards. I think the only fair way is to start with is that the pair is innocent , now prove they are guilty.

Prove that:

1. They left Raffaele's apartment. ...no CCTV images, Curatolo is a junkie and never came forward for months.

2. The burglary was staged. It simply cannot be done. There is no doubt that window was broken from the outside. Absolutely none. You simply cannot say it was or wasn't a burglary by what was taken.

3.They were in that cottage the night of the murder. The presence of DNA of either of them in the cottage is not strange whether the same sample contained Meredith's DNA or not. And since DNA CAN'T be dated it is patently DISHONEST to declare by that it had to be deposited during the murder. So Vixen is flat out being DISHONEST claiming that Amanda washed Meredith's blood whether a moronic Italian Judge ruled that or not.

4. There was a shadow of a motive. And no, skid marks in a toilet or $300 for them would not be a motive.

5. They knew Rudy other than said hello to him. No calls, no texts, no emails.

6.The cooking knife was the weapon. Doesn't match the sheet stain and no DNA could be confirmed. Must believe independent experts.

7.The bathmat foot print could be credibly attributed to anyone. No, it's a joke. It cannot be.

8. They cannot even prove there were real confessions.

This case was and continues to be a joke. It's sad and crazy that anyone is so blinded that they are still arguing that they are guilty.

 

[TruthCalls]

Re the mixed DNA on the bra (and let us not forget the defence's own forensic expert, Vinci, detected both Rudy's and Amanda's DNA on the fabric [6 - 8 alleles] and Pascelli walked off the case). When I was talking of comingled DNA, I should have made clear I was referring to copious quantities of blood. The DNA on the bra clasp almost certainly came from Raff pressing down on it firmly with greasy/sweaty fingers, or perhaps a drop of greasy sweat fell from his brow.

"TruthCalls" might with his 'limited knowledge of Italian' not want to claim what the RTIGF indicates since he's simply regurgitating the same defense argument about the SAL cards. No court has upheld your argument anyway so why do you keep alleging Stefanoni lies and/or incompetence without any real proof? Is it Meredith's DNA, yes, or no? Contamination wasn't proven in court either, merely indicated as a possibility and no, ISF isn't a "court".

There is no such thing "as the same amount of DNA" on the other samples as on 36 A and B, a scientific impossibility. The machine registered some samples as too low, and even after

At issue are the three Luminol traces in Amanda's room and samples 36B and 36C from the knife. I refuse to play along with your diversionary tactics.

Since those three Luminol traces in Amanda's room all tested negative for blood, it is an absolute certainty that the traces were not made from "copious quantities of blood". So I ask you again - how can the three Luminol traces in Amanda's room be made from Meredith's blood when they tested negative for blood and negative for Meredith's DNA?

My limited Italian is still good enough to see that Stefanoni claimed to use Real Time PCR to quantify samples 36A-G. However, included in C&V's report are copies of the results from the Qubit Fluorometer for samples 36A-C, which proves Real Time PCR was not used for these three. Further, C&V wrote in their report that the Real Time PCR report only showed results for samples D-G. The report from the Qubit Fluorometer, a report supplied by Stefanoni, shows 36B and 36C having identical "Too Low" results.

So remind me, what is it I am saying about the RTIGF that in fact isn't really in the RTIGF? I said the RTIGF indicates the use of Real Time PCR on samples 36A-G. Does it or doesn't it? And is there not a report which indicates the use of the Qubit Fluorometer to quantify samples 36A-C? So if Stefanoni's own technical report indicates the use of Real Time PCR, and there is indisputable evidence that a Qubut Fluorometer was used, then how is this anything other than a lie contained in Stefanoni's technical report?

I will remind you - these are the reasons why sample 36B can not be considered Meredith's DNA. Please feel free to point out which ones I have wrong;

1. The sample tested negative for blood using TMB
2. The sample tested negative for human species
3. It was quantified using a Qubit Fluorometer and resulted in "too low"
4. The sample was only amplified once which is insufficient for LCN profiling
5. None of the recommended safeguards to prevent contamination were followed.
6. The knife should not have been removed from it's collection bag by anyone other than a lab technician in a lab setting.

But I will also remind you the question I asked you was why was 36B recorded as DNA positive while 36C was recorded DNA negative when both samples had identical lab results.

 

[Numbers]

It's obvious their return trip 6 weeks later was to find something...anything...to tie Raffaele to the murder. Once Raff's tennis shoes were proven by his father and uncle not to be the origin of the bloody shoeprints, the police had to find some way to inculpate him. After all, he was Amanda's alibi and if they could not prove he was involved in the crime, there was no reason to believe what he said wasn't true.
But I don't think they were trying to frame him. They actually believed he was involved and, therefore, they were going to prove it.

Do you have evidence that "they actually believed he was involved"?

If this was a legitimate case of such belief by the police and prosecutor, why did Mignini alter Amanda's text message in the Nov. 6, 2007 arrest warrant, by deleting the exculpatory part not consistent with a meeting? That is, Mignini changed the text message: "Certo. Ci vediamo più tardi. Buona serata" to: "“Ci vediamo dopo” in the document providing the reasoning for the arrest. Leaving out the closing farewell (Buona serata, [have a] good evening) changes the meaning.

Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/the-interrogation

The point of Stefanoni's "carelessness" in handling the bra clasp with her dirty glove may have been to transfer DNA, but actually that is a hypothesis. It's actually unknown where and when the DNA of 3 males, one of which may be Sollecito, entered the sample allegedly obtained from the bra clasp.

Besides the questionable collection method and timing for the bra clasp, which was such as to make its DNA content, if any, inadmissible in a fair trial, there were concerns in the laboratory procedures that suggest contamination in the lab and possible data tampering. The two positive control samples associate with the run with the bra clasp sample were intended to each have 23 pg/uL of DNA. However, the results provided by Stefanoni showed that these positive control samples actually contained an average of 108 pg/uL of DNA - 5 times too much! Where did all this extra DNA come from? It's obviously from a contamination event in the lab itself. And Stefanoni did not provide valid negative (zero DNA) controls for this batch; the ones supplied did not have ID numbers that matched the run, and apparently were derived from a different test date. In addition, there are anomalies in the number of the the test samples for the bra clasp indicating that the results presented are from a rerun, with the data from the first test suppressed. Stefanoni did not discuss or explain any of these discrepancies, which according to "equality of arms" and "providing all facilities needed by the defense" - rules of the European Convention of Human Rights as interpreted by ECHR case law, she would have been required of the prosecution. As far as known to the public, these runs were not recorded by Professor Potenza. Finally, any DNA on the bra clasps was destroyed by Stefanoni after testing, as she stored the bra section with the clasps in a sealed test tube with an aqueous solution (probably extraction fluid) which would have degraded the DNA.

Sources:

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/bra-clasp-contamination/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredith-kercher-bra-clasp/

And as additional considerations: 1. The bra was apparently torn off from Meredith Kercher's body, in a manner that did not involve touching the clasps, so any DNA on the clasps would not necessarily be associated with the murder/rape of Kercher. 2. Removal of a bra by undoing the clasps does not necessarily involve touching the clasps themselves; the usual procedure is for the two fabric parts on either side of the fasteners to be moved toward each other to unfasten the clasps, freeing the hooks from the eyes. Indeed, this is the usual method to undo hook-and-eye clasps, because the tension force holding the hook against the eye must be overcome, and the curved segment of the hook must be pulled clear of the ring of the eye, to open the clasp.

 

[Stacyhs]

Do you have evidence that "they actually believed he was involved"?

If this was a legitimate case of such belief by the police and prosecutor, why did Mignini alter Amanda's text message in the Nov. 6, 2007 arrest warrant, by deleting the exculpatory part not consistent with a meeting? That is, Mignini changed the text message: "Certo. Ci vediamo più tardi. Buona serata" to: "“Ci vediamo dopo” in the document providing the reasoning for the arrest. Leaving out the closing farewell (Buona serata, [have a] good evening) changes the meaning.

Source: http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/the-interrogation

The point of Stefanoni's "carelessness" in handling the bra clasp with her dirty glove may have been to transfer DNA, but actually that is a hypothesis. It's actually unknown where and when the DNA of 3 males, one of which may be Sollecito, entered the sample allegedly obtained from the bra clasp.

Besides the questionable collection method and timing for the bra clasp, which was such as to make its DNA content, if any, inadmissible in a fair trial, there were concerns in the laboratory procedures that suggest contamination in the lab and possible data tampering. The two positive control samples associate with the run with the bra clasp sample were intended to each have 23 pg/uL of DNA. However, the results provided by Stefanoni showed that these positive control samples actually contained an average of 108 pg/uL of DNA - 5 times too much! Where did all this extra DNA come from? It's obviously from a contamination event in the lab itself. And Stefanoni did not provide valid negative (zero DNA) controls for this batch; the ones supplied did not have ID numbers that matched the run, and apparently were derived from a different test date. In addition, there are anomalies in the number of the the test samples for the bra clasp indicating that the results presented are from a rerun, with the data from the first test suppressed. Stefanoni did not discuss or explain any of these discrepancies, which according to "equality of arms" and "providing all facilities needed by the defense" - rules of the European Convention of Human Rights as interpreted by ECHR case law, she would have been required of the prosecution. As far as known to the public, these runs were not recorded by Professor Potenza. Finally, any DNA on the bra clasps was destroyed by Stefanoni after testing, as she stored the bra section with the clasps in a sealed test tube with an aqueous solution (probably extraction fluid) which would have degraded the DNA.

Sources:

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/bra-clasp-contamination/
http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/meredith-kercher-bra-clasp/

And as additional considerations: 1. The bra was apparently torn off from Meredith Kercher's body, in a manner that did not involve touching the clasps, so any DNA on the clasps would not necessarily be associated with the murder/rape of Kercher. 2. Removal of a bra by undoing the clasps does not necessarily involve touching the clasps themselves; the usual procedure is for the two fabric parts on either side of the fasteners to be moved toward each other to unfasten the clasps, freeing the hooks from the eyes. Indeed, this is the usual method to undo hook-and-eye clasps, because the tension force holding the hook against the eye must be overcome, and the curved segment of the hook must be pulled clear of the ring of the eye, to open the clasp.

You are preaching to the choir here, Numbers. But to answer your question "Do you have evidence that "they actually believed he was involved", I can only go by what I know of the case.
The police's instant assumption that the break-in was staged, the way in which they interpreted Knox's and Sollecito's actions including the so-called "canoodling" outside on Nov 2, the postales mistaken belief they arrived before Raff made the 112 call, the miscommunication regarding Meredith's door being "always" vs. "never" locked, etc were all "evidence" to the police. In order for me to believe that there was an intentional framing of Knox and Sollecito, I'd have to be as conspiracy prone as the PGP and their moronic "Masons/Mafia/American government pressure/forensic experts shills/paid posters by the PR machine nonsense.
No, the police and prosecution were simply inept and incompetent. But I don't believe they were out to intentionally frame two people they knew to be innocent.

I agree with you about the bra. I've had 50 years experience in removing them and I know that the DNA would have been on the cloth the hooks were sewn to if removed in the normal manner. I've pointed that out myself many times to PGP.

 

[Numbers]

You are preaching to the choir here, Numbers. But to answer your question "Do you have evidence that "they actually believed he was involved", I can only go by what I know of the case.
The police's instant assumption that the break-in was staged, the way in which they interpreted Knox's and Sollecito's actions including the so-called "canoodling" outside on Nov 2, the postales mistaken belief they arrived before Raff made the 112 call, the miscommunication regarding Meredith's door being "always" vs. "never" locked, etc were all "evidence" to the police. In order for me to believe that there was an intentional framing of Knox and Sollecito, I'd have to be as conspiracy prone as the PGP and their moronic "Masons/Mafia/American government pressure/forensic experts shills/paid posters by the PR machine nonsense.
No, the police and prosecution were simply inept and incompetent. But I don't believe they were out to intentionally frame two people they knew to be innocent.

I agree with you about the bra. I've had 50 years experience in removing them and I know that the DNA would have been on the cloth the hooks were sewn to if removed in the normal manner. I've pointed that out myself many times to PGP.

But what is your opinion of Mignini's falsification, on Nov. 6, 2007, in the arrest warrant, by misquoting by omission of the key words "have a good evening"? Was that an act of incompetence or carelessness? I suggest it greatly changed the apparent meaning of the Italian words that Amanda used to indicate "see you later, have a good evening" to more plausibly mean "let's see each other later". Isn't that "framing" or rather "official misconduct"? Didn't the whole interrogation, including the violations of Italian law regarding cautioning a suspect and interrogating a suspect only in the presence of a lawyer (CPP Articles 63 and 64) suggest "official misconduct" for the purpose of building a case against some vulnerable persons (Amanda, Raffaele, and Patrick) without regard to whether there were any reasonable grounds for suspicion? The idea that the break-in was "staged" may be an after the fact cover-up, just as the idea that the blood in the downstairs flat came from a cat was clearly an after the fact cover-up and not supported by any scientific test and in fact apparently contradicted by DNA in the blood replicating under PCR (forensic PCR is human specific).

 

[Vixen]

No, she did not. Under oath she said she could neither confirm nor deny touching "the metal bit". Indeed, do you want me to show that pic AGAIN taken by the SP which shows her handling them?

Even in John Follain's book he recounts Stefanani's testamony in this regard.

She actually does, off the record. (Darkness Descending).

And in any case, you would have to have magical thinking to believe Raff's DNA flew onto the bra clasp from a latex glove.

 

[Vixen]

No, in fact the DNA on the bra clasp IS absolutely in dispute. You may believe it is indisputable, but just like your belief in God, there are a hell of a lot of us that roll our eyes.
I really DON'T care what some judge believes. That does not make it true.

I don't believe in witches any more than I do astrology or God.

No. Even the defence had to concur it was fully Raff's DNA. Professor Novelli gave it statistical odds of >3 billion to one against it NOT being his.

Who cares what 'the crowd' believes. Most are no different from beasts in the field.

As for not believing in judges, so you are telling us law should be administered by the Friends of Amanda Knox and spin merchants disseminating press releases.

There we have it: let's do away with the fairest social system for justice (i.e., a trial with twelve just men as your peers, evolved over at least sixteen hundred years, said to have originated in Sweden, cf the word, 'land') and revert to kangaroo courts based on whether the perp is a US citizen and appeals to Donald Trump's basest instincts.

'Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way as to take the prize.'

Life is short, the afterlife is everlasting. Nothing you say can change this.

 

[Vixen]

I don't believe he ever said he did not touch it. Vixen wants us to infer that he didn't because he doesn't mention touching the door frame in his description of trying to force the door down with his shoulder and kicking it. Why would he? Touching the door frame would, in no way, have an impact on his shouldering and kicking the door.

I don't believe he ever said he was not the King of Spain.

 

[Vixen]

There you go making declarations about DNA and what is factual. Sorry, no one considers you to be an expert on DNA. And just because Raff said he didn't touch the door frame does not mean he didn't do it. He very well may have just misrembered. People are terrible witnesses over that kind of stuff.

Conjecture, speculation, second-guessing, what-if lala fantasy land. Koo Koo.

Courts don't deal with this stuff.