Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
This is what PGP do; present the evidence and they just ignore it as if it never happened. Willful blindness runs rampant among them.
The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 29
- Thread starter Bill Williams
- Start date
- Status
This is what PGP do; present the evidence and they just ignore it as if it never happened. Willful blindness runs rampant among them.
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
I missed it, sorry.
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,960
"Very strong robust" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
(Do you even actually know how many picograms of Sollecito's DNA were present on the tiny hook of that clasp (with not one picogram of his DNA on any other surrounding part of the clasp......)? Do you even know what a picogram is?)
The math has been explained to Vixen numerous times. Apparently she thinks the total quantity of DNA in a commingled sample determines whether a sample is LCN or not. There must be something in the expression "Meredith's DNA was six times that of Raffaele's in the sample" that confuses her.
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
A lot of thing confuse Vixen. Like facts.
bagels
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2015
- Messages
- 2,274
You mean like Hellmann was bent by the mafia, the Supreme Court was fixed by the US State Department, the ECHR threw Knox a bone, etc etc?
Haha
In fact, in her measurement using the Qubit fluorometer, Stefanoni reported that there was no measurable DNA in the sample she collected from the knife blade. After finding no measurable DNA in the sample, Stefanoni used imprecisely documented and scientifically unverified and unvalidated methods of sample manipulation and concentration, apparently including a suction technique which could draw DNA contaminants into the DNA profile test sample.
The sample was obtained from a knife blade that showed no blood nor any human or animal tissue. Stefanoni alleged that she had collected the sample from a scratch relative close to the knife blade tip. No evidence of this scratch could could be obtained under micro-photography or other objective, scientific method, according to Stefanoni. No micro-photograph or other objective, scientific verification of the existence of this sample was ever provided by Stefanoni.
Stefanoni falsely claimed in her testimony before the Massei court that her laboratory had no contamination. However, DNA quantification results from several of her control samples provided to the defense definitively showed DNA contamination in her lab.
The DNA profile test sample was tested by Stefanoni using an unverified and unvalidated DNA profile test method, although the DNA quantification sample showed no measurable DNA. This knife blade sample was the only one of a number of samples that showed no measurable DNA that was tested for a DNA profile. Stefanoni claimed that the DNA profile obtained from this no-measurable-DNA sample matched Meredith Kercher's DNA.
The amount of DNA allegedly in this knife blade sample was present at an LCN level; however, Stefanoni's lab was not set up, in terms of contamination control, sample handling, profiling test procedures, and interpretative analysis, to conduct scientifically or forensically valid LCN DNA profile testing.
The above summary of the problems with Stefanoni's lab and the handling and DNA profile testing of the knife blade sample is sufficient to conclude that the alleged result, a claim that it produced a DNA profile that matches Meredith Kercher's DNA profile, is not credible.
There was no evidence presented that the alleged result could not be due to a contamination event; it is the obligation of the prosecution to demonstrate that their scientific results are credible and not, for example, the result of contamination. In fact, all the evidence suggests that the alleged result can only be from contamination or deliberate fabrication. In terms of Italian law, the alleged result is circumstantial evidence that is not serious, precise, and consistent. Thus, as circumstantial evidence, it cannot be used to infer a fact against the accused under Italian law, CPP Article 192, section 2.
Last edited:
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Gill is just quoting the dishonest defence advocates Conti and Vecchiotti there. The case of quanary transfer certainly does not happen after six weeks. The DNA has to be fresh for it to 'stick'. Most comes form body fluids or hair follicles or skin with sweat glands. Once they have dried out they have dried out and won't be readily transferable.
Use your common sense.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Liar: there was a strong 15-allelle DNA imprint of Meredith Kercher on the blade, extracted from a striation.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Originally found under the body but not collected or analyzed until 46 days later across the room and under a dirty rug among a pile of other things. Which. you. fail. to. mention. Talk about "lying by omission"!
If there was contamination, Raff's DNA wouldn't just be on the crook of the bra hook, it'd be on surrounding items.
If the DNA of Guede on the cuffs of the sweatshirt nearby are sound then so is the DNA of Raff on the bra clasp.
Can't see you getting into a rage about Rudy's DNA being found by neutral objective scientific methods and as witnessed in Raff's case by expert defence DNA forensic scientists, including the eminent Dr Torres. None of them complained about the cold scientific methods used to extract the information. The results appear on a print out and there is no way Stefanoni could have faked them nor would she as a police officer and respected biologist have any motive to do so, bearing in mind Raff is a fellow Italian, which proves her total impartiality in the case.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
He had a knife.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Raff's DNA sample found was NOT LCN. It matched 17 of his alleles - BINGO! - a full house. In addition the RFU peaks were high.
The defence and C&V accepted it WAS Raff's DNA with a scientifically calculated probability that it was >3bn/one it was not.
You're in denial.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Watch my lips: Raff's strong robustly sound DNA was found on the bra clasp. Let that sink in.
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
You said tertiary DNA transfer does not happen. You have been proven wrong. Yet you bull forward unaffected.
That's what has sunk in.
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
Huh? There is not a sentence in this post which is true.
Much like your claim that tertiary DNA transfer does not happen.
We're in yet another cycle in this thread where you claim a howling falsehood, are proven wrong, and then simply double-down diverting to other howling falsehoods, never once offering a citation - except for the times you cite something that proves you wrong.
As TomG would say.... Hoots!
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
..... a striation that no one saw, which Stefanoni claimed could only be seen by her. The knife still exists. No one else has seen what Stefanoni claimed.
BTW - guilter-nutters once posted a picture of that knife claiming it showed the striation. Then I posted the sentence in the Massei report which claimed that no pics of the striation were possible. Then guilter-nutters clicked out crickets.
It's not a good strategic ploy on your part to mention the non-existent striation.
Massei p 225 said:
Last edited:
Here's information about the alleged DNA evidence on the bra clasp. DNA evidence is, by definition, circumstantial evidence. (All evidence that is not the direct testimony of someone's personal experience is circumstantial. Thus, all forensic test results are circumstantial evidence.) Again, it must be remembered that, under Italian law, CPP Article 192 section 2, in order to lawfully infer a fact from circumstantial evidence, that evidence must be serious, precise, and consistent.
However, the alleged DNA evidence from the bra clasp was not serious, precise, and consistent, and therefore no fact against the accused can be inferred from that evidence. The only facts that are clear regarding the bra clasp DNA evidence are that: 1) it was irredeemably compromised by the way the police neglected to collect the bra clasp at the proper time - immediately on their initial collection of evidence at the cottage, rather than 46 days later, with no chain of custody accounting for its disposition during that interval - and the forensically improper way it was handled during its collection; 2) the observed complex DNA profile allegedly obtained from the clasp by Stefanoni shows contamination consisting of the DNA of several unknown males as well as Meredith Kercher and 3) the observed complex DNA profile allegedly obtained from the clasp was from a second test; there was clear evidence in her records of a first test by Stefanoni the results of which were not reported.
The bra clasp was improperly stored in tubes containing an aqueous medium after Stefanoni tested it, thereby destroying the integrity of any DNA sequences on it, so no retest of the clasp was possible. The clasps were rusted by the aqueous medium. The correct storage to preserve the DNA would be under absolutely dry conditions, preferably frozen. This failure to carefully preserve this alleged critical evidence suggests intent by Stefanoni or other authorities to prevent retesting.
Here are some excerpts from www.amandaknoxcase. com about the bra clasp.
"The famous bra clasp was photographed on the floor of Meredith Kercher’s room on November 2nd, 2007 but collected as evidence on December 18th. It was unaccounted for and “missing in action” for 46 days, a period in which the crime scene (indeed the whole flat) was turned upside-down during undocumented inspections, so much so that it was recovered four or five feet away from where it was originally photographed.
The Y-haplotype testing for the bra clasp showed peaks belonging to at least three unknown male profiles, besides the one attributed to Raffaele Sollecito, a clear indication of contamination.
The prosecutions objection to contamination is the lack of a source of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA in the flat (except on a cigarette butt), but the same can be said for the three unknown male profiles, which are nevertheless on the bra clasp.
The problem is that an accurate mapping of every possible source of DNA in the flat wasn’t done, otherwise there would be multiple occurrences of two unknown female profiles corresponding to Laura Mezzetti and Filomena Romanelli.
The bra clasp moreover couldn’t be further tested by the independent experts, Professors Conti and Vecchiotti, because it was either intentionally destroyed at worst or stored incorrectly due to incompetence by prosecution expert, Patrizia Stefanoni, who allowed the hooks to rust from storing it in extraction buffer. See Evidence Destroyed for photos. In other words, the key piece of evidence against Raffaele Sollecito was rendered useless."
Regarding the handling of the clasps, it should be pointed out that the police, during the collection of the bra clasp, did indeed touch the clasps directly with dirty gloves. This is shown in a photo supplied by the police on the amandaknoxcase site.
However, the alleged DNA evidence from the bra clasp was not serious, precise, and consistent, and therefore no fact against the accused can be inferred from that evidence. The only facts that are clear regarding the bra clasp DNA evidence are that: 1) it was irredeemably compromised by the way the police neglected to collect the bra clasp at the proper time - immediately on their initial collection of evidence at the cottage, rather than 46 days later, with no chain of custody accounting for its disposition during that interval - and the forensically improper way it was handled during its collection; 2) the observed complex DNA profile allegedly obtained from the clasp by Stefanoni shows contamination consisting of the DNA of several unknown males as well as Meredith Kercher and 3) the observed complex DNA profile allegedly obtained from the clasp was from a second test; there was clear evidence in her records of a first test by Stefanoni the results of which were not reported.
The bra clasp was improperly stored in tubes containing an aqueous medium after Stefanoni tested it, thereby destroying the integrity of any DNA sequences on it, so no retest of the clasp was possible. The clasps were rusted by the aqueous medium. The correct storage to preserve the DNA would be under absolutely dry conditions, preferably frozen. This failure to carefully preserve this alleged critical evidence suggests intent by Stefanoni or other authorities to prevent retesting.
Here are some excerpts from www.amandaknoxcase. com about the bra clasp.
"The famous bra clasp was photographed on the floor of Meredith Kercher’s room on November 2nd, 2007 but collected as evidence on December 18th. It was unaccounted for and “missing in action” for 46 days, a period in which the crime scene (indeed the whole flat) was turned upside-down during undocumented inspections, so much so that it was recovered four or five feet away from where it was originally photographed.
The Y-haplotype testing for the bra clasp showed peaks belonging to at least three unknown male profiles, besides the one attributed to Raffaele Sollecito, a clear indication of contamination.
The prosecutions objection to contamination is the lack of a source of Raffaele Sollecito’s DNA in the flat (except on a cigarette butt), but the same can be said for the three unknown male profiles, which are nevertheless on the bra clasp.
The problem is that an accurate mapping of every possible source of DNA in the flat wasn’t done, otherwise there would be multiple occurrences of two unknown female profiles corresponding to Laura Mezzetti and Filomena Romanelli.
The bra clasp moreover couldn’t be further tested by the independent experts, Professors Conti and Vecchiotti, because it was either intentionally destroyed at worst or stored incorrectly due to incompetence by prosecution expert, Patrizia Stefanoni, who allowed the hooks to rust from storing it in extraction buffer. See Evidence Destroyed for photos. In other words, the key piece of evidence against Raffaele Sollecito was rendered useless."
Regarding the handling of the clasps, it should be pointed out that the police, during the collection of the bra clasp, did indeed touch the clasps directly with dirty gloves. This is shown in a photo supplied by the police on the amandaknoxcase site.
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
What? Have you just entirely made this up to suit your own ends. What arrant nonsense.
Yeah. Go and find out how many picograms (micrograms actually) of Guede's DNA were found on the sweatshirt cuff. Then compare with the number of picograms of Sollecito's DNA found on the hook of the bra clasp. Then have a think about the relative numbers. Then get back to us....
See above about trying to comprehend the difference in quantities. And at the same time, perhaps try to receive some education in low-tempate DNA analysis - paying particular attention to the extreme care needed in handling, storing and analysing objects for those minuscule levels of DNA. Then once you've done that, try taking an objective look at Stefanoni's lab, and try to ask yourself how many of the critically-required processes and protocols she employed when coming up with these low-template-level "results".
And perhaps the penny might eventually drop (although in fact I doubt it somehow...)
Oh and nice work with yet another strawman about Stefanoni "faking" results. Nobody is suggesting that Stefanoni invented these results to frame people - and if you think that's what people are suggesting, then in turn I would suggest reading for comprehension.
Rather, people are suggesting (well, more than suggesting) that Stefanoni simply didn't know what she was doing when it came to low-template DNA analysis, that she ran a horribly sloppy operation from top to bottom (including shocking errors in crime scene evidence collection, massive mistakes in the handling and storage of evidentiary items, and a lab that was in no way whatsoever capable of conducting reliable low-template DNA analysis.
And people are also suggesting that Stefanoni didn't even know the shortcomings or limitations of her work on this case, but instead resorted to dissembling and obfuscation in order to try to defend the (non-existent) credibility and reliability of her "results" from the knife and the bra clasp.
Carry on
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
Well, what's sinking in is your utterly absurd repetition of the descriptor "strong robustly sound" (which doesn't even make sense, by the way....) for the quantity of Sollecito's DNA on the hook of the bra clasp.
Again, please go and find out how many picograms of Sollecito's DNA were on that hook. And then please try to learn what a picogram actually is, and what the number of picograms of Sollecito's DNA actually means in the context of DNA analysis. And then realise how laughably nonsensical your description "strong robustly sound" actually is.
As you were......
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
You still don't understand.
The issue around the bra clasp is one of contamination. As you say, it's accepted that it's Sollecito's DNA. But it's also accepted that it's comingled with the DNA of at least two other (unknown) males. How did the DNA of those males get onto that tiny clasp, Vixen? Was there a hoard of additional men all clawing at Kercher's bra? Or...... now think carefully at this point..... could there *possibly* have been a contamination scenario where tiny quantities of multiple people's DNA (including Sollecito's) found their way onto the bra clasp as it was almost-literally kicked around the dirty floor of Kercher's room and then swept under a rug amidst a pile of dust and other debris?
Because if you cannot bring yourself to understand or accept the contamination likelihood, then you find yourself in the awkward position of explaining how that other male DNA found its way onto the bra clasp. Or are you so far overinvested that you are prepared to claim that those other males' DNA got there by contamination, but that Sollecito's alone got there through primary transfer when he touched Kercher's bra?
I can only see one person in these threads who's in denial. And it's not the one you think it is.
One other point, probably mentioned in earlier posts, is that hook-and-eye closures, such as the bra clasp, are not opened or closed by grabbing the hooks or the eyes. Generally, one holds in each hand, respectively, the fabric on either side of the hooks and eyes and pulls the fabric to free the hooks from the eyes or to insert the hooks into the eyes.
In analogy, some men's trousers (pants to us in the US) have a flat hook and flat eye for closure on either side of the top of the fly. Closing and opening is accomplished by pulling the fabric on either side of the fly, and not by holding either the hook or eye.
In analogy, some men's trousers (pants to us in the US) have a flat hook and flat eye for closure on either side of the top of the fly. Closing and opening is accomplished by pulling the fabric on either side of the fly, and not by holding either the hook or eye.
- Status