The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 29

[Welshman]

Liar: there was a strong 15-allelle DNA imprint of Meredith Kercher on the blade, extracted from a striation.

This post is typical of the blatant hypocrisy we see from Vixen when she attacks people for lying and then lies in the same post. This post is an example of this. Vixen lies about there being a 15 allele DNA profile on the knife a claim the prosecution never made.

 

[Vixen]

I have rarely come across so much arrant ignorance and complete disregard of a merits court findings.

 

[Stacyhs]

I have rarely come across so much arrant ignorance and complete disregard of a merits courts findings that were overturned on appeal due to the total collapse of the prosecution case after re-examination by a higher court.

Fixed that for you, Vix. You're welcome.

ETA: My mistake. That should read TWO higher courts.

 

[Vixen]

I have rarely come across so much arrant ignorance and complete disregard of a merits courts findings that were overturned on appeal due to the total collapse of the prosecution case after re-examination by a higher court.

Fixed that for you, Vix. You're welcome.

ETA: My mistake. That should read TWO higher courts.

Don't tell me. You think OJ Simpson is innocent.

No surprise there.

 

[Bill Williams]

I have rarely come across so much arrant ignorance and complete disregard of a merits court findings.

1) the 2015 Supreme Court did not disregard the merits' courts findings. In Section 9.4 of their report they summarized both sets of findings, prosecution and defense, and concluded that even if the prosecution case was true it still did not warrant a conviction for either Sollecito or Knox.

2) speaking of arrogance and ignorance, do you still stand by your claim that there's no such thing as tertiary contamination?

 

[Stacyhs]

Don't tell me. You think OJ Simpson is innocent.

No surprise there.

OW! I just got whiplash from your deflection attempt.

Wrong as usual, Vix. I think OJ is guilty as hell based on the evidence.
.

Criminal Trial Evidence

1. The 9-1-1 call and the history of Simpson's violence directed at Nicole Brown.

2. Hair evidence: (1) hairs consistent with that of Simpson found on cap at Bundy residence, (2) hairs consistent with that of Simpson found on Ron Goldman's shirt.

3. Fiber evidence: (1) cotton fibers consistent with the carpet in the Bronco found on glove at Rockingham, (2) fibers consistent with the carpet from the Bronco found on cap at Bundy residence.

4. Blood evidence: (1) killer dropped blood near shoe prints at Bundy, (2) blood dropped at Bundy was of same type as Simpson's (about 0.5% of population would match), (3) Simpson had fresh cuts on left hand on day after murder, (4) blood found in Bronco, (5) blood found in foyer and master bedroom of Simpson home, (5) blood found on Simpson's driveway, (6) blood on socks in OJ's home matched Nicole's.

5. Glove evidence: (1) left glove found at Bundy and right glove found at Simpson residence are Aris Light gloves, size XL, (2) Nicole Brown bought pair of Aris Light XL gloves in 1990 at Bloomingdale's, (3) Simpson wore Aris Light gloves from 1990 to June, 1994.

6. Shoe evidence: (1) shoe prints found at Bundy were from a size 12 Bruno Magli shoe, (2) bloody shoe impression on Bronco carpet is consistent with a Magli shoe, (3) Simpson wore a size 12 shoe.

7. Other evidence: (1) flight in Bronco, (2) strange reaction to phone call informing him of Nicole Brown's death, etc.

https://famous-trials.com/simpson/1857-evidence

 

[Bill Williams]

Don't tell me. You think OJ Simpson is innocent.

No surprise there.

No, the Supreme Court of Italy thinks that Sollecito and Knox are innocent, for not having committed the act.

 

[Stacyhs]

1) the 2015 Supreme Court did not disregard the merits' courts findings. In Section 9.4 of their report they summarized both sets of findings, prosecution and defense, and concluded that even if the prosecution case was true it still did not warrant a conviction for either Sollecito or Knox.

2) speaking of arrogance and ignorance, do you still stand by your claim that there's no such thing as tertiary contamination?

....I made up those 10 points and that Guede referred to the knife as a 'stiletto'?

 

[Bill Williams]

....I made up those 10 points and that Guede referred to the knife as a 'stiletto'?

I'm not keeping track of the dozens of claims that Vixen simply chucks into the thread; and when proven wrong simply keeps posting as if nothing had happened.

What's the count up to now?

 

[acbytesla]

I'm not keeping track of the dozens of claims that Vixen simply chucks into the thread; and when proven wrong simply keeps posting as if nothing had happened.

What's the count up to now?

I stopped counting. Years ago.

 

[Vixen]

1) the 2015 Supreme Court did not disregard the merits' courts findings. In Section 9.4 of their report they summarized both sets of findings, prosecution and defense, and concluded that even if the prosecution case was true it still did not warrant a conviction for either Sollecito or Knox.

2) speaking of arrogance and ignorance, do you still stand by your claim that there's no such thing as tertiary contamination?

If there is a case for tertiary contamination it is up to the person claiming it to demonstrate the path of contamination.

All these 'experiments with talcum powder' the murderer deniers like to cite are based on dust flying around in a short time frame. Gill himself very clearly writes that secondary contamination is unlikely after 24 hours. The lunatic PIP's are trying to have people believe Raff's DNA got on the bra clasp from (1) the door and then (2) the glove and then (3) onto the crook of the bra clasp = TERTIARY transfer, after six weeks.

Conti came out with nonsense about'DNA is like dust flying around' omitting to mention that DNA fragments from shedding skin will only show a few alleles, which is why the forensic standard in the UK is 'must be at least ten alleles to be robust evidence'. Mez' DNA on the knife was FIFTEEN alleles matching (despite the LCN) and Raff's an irrefutable SEVENTEEN alleles - considered a full house from a sample that was not LCN and had high RFU's. It is neither here nor there that fragments of background noise DNA of four or five alleles were also found because you cannot discount they are the sort of dust Conti was referring to. The testing methods were witnessed by defence forensic experts and they raised no complaints.

If you believe that you'll believe OJ Simpson was hundreds of miles away when Nicola and Goldman were butchered or some 'bushy haired stranger' killed Susan Smith's children.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm not keeping track of the dozens of claims that Vixen simply chucks into the thread; and when proven wrong simply keeps posting as if nothing had happened.

What's the count up to now?

Somewhere up there with the number of verified Trump lies.

Did Vix ever attempt to explain just how the DNA of at least two other men were found on that bra hook?

Did she ever decide whether Knox was covering for Guede or setting him up by pointing out his kebab-leftover and bloody footprint to the police?

 

[Vixen]

Somewhere up there with the number of verified Trump lies.

Did Vix ever attempt to explain just how the DNA of at least two other men were found on that bra hook?

Did she ever decide whether Knox was covering for Guede or setting him up by pointing out his kebab-leftover and bloody footprint to the police?

It is neither here nor there that fragments of background noise DNA of four or five alleles were also found because you cannot discount they are the sort of dust Conti was referring to. The testing methods were witnessed by defence forensic experts and they raised no complaints.

 

[Vixen]

Somewhere up there with the number of verified Trump lies.

Did Vix ever attempt to explain just how the DNA of at least two other men were found on that bra hook?

Did she ever decide whether Knox was covering for Guede or setting him up by pointing out his kebab-leftover and bloody footprint to the police?

Both Rudy and Amanda were together in the cottage during the murder.

As decreed by the Supreme Court x 2 (Bruno Marasca and Florence Feb 2017 as rubber-stamped by the Supreme Court, dismissing Raff's appeal.)

It is a legal fact that Knox and Guede were present during the 'murder of the young Meredith Kercher' and Sollecito 'almost certainly'.

But wait! His DNA shows up clearly and unequivocally on the murder victim's underwear and her DNA on his knife from his apartment where she had never stepped.

 

[Stacyhs]

If there is a case for tertiary contamination it is up to the person claiming it to demonstrate the path of contamination.

Au contraire, ma belle Vixen:

In any case, the arguments set forth above, which refute the idea that the burden to prove the source of contamination rests on the defendant making that claim, should be recalled here: it is, on the contrary, those using that result [as evidence] to support an accusation who have to prove that the procedure and, prior to that, the collection stage happened in accordance with the methods and precautions necessary to avoid contamination. As noted above, this did not happen here.

(Hellman MR)

All these 'experiments with talcum powder' the murderer deniers like to cite are based on dust flying around in a short time frame. Gill himself very clearly writes that secondary contamination is unlikely after 24 hours. The lunatic PIP's are trying to have people believe Raff's DNA got on the bra clasp from (1) the door and then (2) the glove and then (3) onto the crook of the bra clasp = TERTIARY transfer, after six weeks.

You continue to make this one claim about Gill when I've presented several from Gill stating that the DNA on the bra is due to contamination.

Conti came out with nonsense about'DNA is like dust flying around' omitting to mention that DNA fragments from shedding skin will only show a few alleles, which is why the forensic standard in the UK is 'must be at least ten alleles to be robust evidence'. Mez' DNA on the knife was FIFTEEN alleles matching (despite the LCN) and Raff's an irrefutable SEVENTEEN alleles - considered a full house from a sample that was not LCN and had high RFU's. It is neither here nor there that fragments of background noise DNA of four or five alleles were also found because you cannot discount they are the sort of dust Conti was referring to. The testing methods were witnessed by defence forensic experts and they raised no complaints.

You keep repeating yourself like a broken record while, despite several challenges to do so, failing to provide a single forensic expert who supports Stefanoni's conclusions. On the other hand, other forensic experts do support Conti and Vecchiotti's findings.

If you believe that you'll believe OJ Simpson was hundreds of miles away when Nicola Nicole and Goldman were butchered or some 'bushy haired stranger' killed Susan Smith's children.

LOL. I don't believe either of the above. Try again.

 

[Bill Williams]

Did Vix ever attempt to explain just how the DNA of at least two other men were found on that bra hook?*

Did she ever decide whether Knox was covering for Guede or setting him up by pointing out his kebab-leftover and bloody footprint to the police?

Both Rudy and Amanda were together in the cottage during the murder.

As decreed by the Supreme Court x 2 (Bruno Marasca and Florence Feb 2017 as rubber-stamped by the Supreme Court, dismissing Raff's appeal.)

It is a legal fact that Knox and Guede were present during the 'murder of the young Meredith Kercher' and Sollecito 'almost certainly'.

You keep repeating this. You ignore what the Supreme Court actually said, which has been posted here dozens of times. EVEN IF TRUE.... oh never mind.

You also claim that there's no such thing as tertiary transfer to produce DNA contaminating. You simply ignore and continue posting factoids.

 

[Stacyhs]

It is neither here nor there that fragments of background noise DNA of four or five alleles were also found because you cannot discount they are the sort of dust Conti was referring to.

LOL....THOSE are contamination but Raff's DNA can't possibly be because...reasons.

The experts explained why that sample was not reliable:

a mixed trace, a mixture of DNA, left by several unidentified contributors. Indeed – as both Prof. Tagliabracci and the Expert Panel explained – while the trace is substantial [in quantity], it is nonetheless subject to problems in its interpretation, not excluding contamination, when it is split between several contributors.

Therefore, dealing as we are with a graph produced by a complex procedure and technology and sensitive to a multitude of factors, it is easy to understand that when a mixture is present (a sample with several contributors) the problem of tracing a specific profile – that is, of identifying the peaks to pair in the graph, distinguishing them from those which are irrelevant and from other pairings – is particularly complex, since it is very often not possible to exclude alternative but equally plausible pairings.
And this is why Prof. Vecchiotti was able to say that it was fundamentally possible to identify anyone’s profile in the graph obtained from the Scientific Police, even her own.

Hence, it is certainly true to say that alongside the victim’s profile (major contributor), there is also a profile attributable to Sollecito in the graph: but there is no guarantee that this profile is really accurate, since if one considers other peaks also present in the graph but not taken into account by the Scientific Police, different conclusions might be drawn.

The testing methods were witnessed by defence forensic experts and they raised no complaints.

Sigh. They witnessed the testing in the lab after collection. If the contamination occurred at the time of collection by Stefanoni (she of the dirty gloves which touched the hook), their observation of the testing would be meaningless. Or do you think they could have seen that contamination? Sort of like Knox could have seen her own DNA to clean up, right?

 

[bagels]

I have rarely come across so much arrant ignorance and complete disregard of a merits court findings.

If I wanted to convince an educated and reasonable adult that Amanda Knox was innocent I would hand them the guilter translation of the Massei report and nothing more and tell them to knock themselves out.

Your brain probably cant fathom that but normal people would read parts like "ignore the laws of physics and the glass spray pattern proving the opposite, the rock was thrown from inside because i say so" and so on and realize, oh the merits court is not using any sort of reason or logic and the presented evidence doesn't begin to prove the conclusions they reach.

 

[Stacyhs]

Both Rudy and Amanda were together in the cottage during the murder.

As decreed by the Supreme Court x 2 (Bruno Marasca and Florence Feb 2017 as rubber-stamped by the Supreme Court, dismissing Raff's appeal.)

It is a legal fact that Knox and Guede were present during the 'murder of the young Meredith Kercher' and Sollecito 'almost certainly'.

It's almost like you haven't comprehended anything in this thread for the last 4 years (post Marasca). You keep banging on with the same lies. You ignore what Marasca actually wrote in favor of your own alternate factoids. I'd explain to you once more what the words EVEN IF mean, but why bother?

But wait! His DNA shows up clearly and unequivocally on the murder victim's underwear and her DNA on his knife from his apartment where she had never stepped.

No matter how many times it's explained to you why forensic expertS disagree with that, you simply refuse to believe anything that doesn't confirm you bias. It's rather sad, really.

 

[bagels]

And of course they would ultimately ask the question, why do we need to fit in this sloppy and at best ambiguous evidence into a convoluted and improbable crime scenario that doesn't make sense or fit into a coherent picture or timeline, when all the primary evidence points to the burglar Rudy Guede with no established connections to the students and who could've simply broke in and killed Meredith on his own?

This extremely pressing question is what separates guilter fanatics from normal rational people and why you will be confused about this (closed, solved, and finalized) case for the rest of your days Vixen.