• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 29

Status
Not open for further replies.
TruthCalls said:
I'm starting to feel like Charlie Brown, trying to kick the football and always falling for Lucy's 'pulling the ball away' trick. I never learn. :(

Like looking at a bad wreck, someone mentions TJMK and I can't resist visting the cesspool AGAIN... and what's the first thing I see? - a picture of Mignini and Stefanoni talking, with the caption of "Dr Stefanoni with Dr Mignini, two world-class professionals". :jaw-dropp

I know better than to go there, but I can't resist these tales of lunacy... I feel like I need to see them myself, and I always wind up feeling dirty and filled with regret.
Click to expand...

A psychological study on those still active on TJMK would be extremely interesting.

"Dr Stefanoni with Dr Mignini, two world-class professionals".

LOL! Both were solidly shot down in a scathing SC MR but to TJMK, they're "world-class professionals". On the other hand, every expert who criticized Stefanoni's work/findings and any judge who acquitted is "bent" and/or under the control of the mafia and/or Masons. Hysterical!
 
Last edited:
Stacyhs said:
A psychological study on those still active on TJMK would be extremely interesting.

"Dr Stefanoni with Dr Mignini, two world-class professionals".

LOL! Both were solidly shot down in a scathing SC MR but to TJMK, they're "world-class professionals". On the other hand, every expert who criticized Stefanoni's work/findings and any judge who acquitted is "bent" and/or under the control of the mafia and/or Masons. Hysterical!
Click to expand...

Yeah, in the article with that photo he refers to both Gil and Hampikian as "hoaxers". Delusional doesn't quite capture it.
 
Stacyhs said:
No judge said that. It was a quote from Prof. Novelli regarding dust and contamination.



Of course, contamination via other means, such as dirty gloves, is quite possible as demonstrated by studies. You know, like the dirty ones Stefanoni is shown wearing in the police video of the bra clasp collection.
Click to expand...

So ignorant. You are claiming DNA cultivates on a glove.

Sollecito's DNA is on the bra clasp hook because he placed it there.

If it were on a glove it certainly wouldn't show as a black speck.
 
Stacyhs said:
What a ridiculous statement. The source of contamination cannot always be discovered but that does not mean contamination did not occur. In the Sollecito clasp incident, it's rather obvious to anyone with more than half a brain that the clasp, found 6 weeks after the murder across the room from its original location and among other objects is not going to be in the same forensic state as it was immediately after the murder. It is visibly dirtier and 'rattier' when collected than it was when first found.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_716695daf2b34a99ee.jpg[/qimg]

Then there is the video of the collection showing it being held with dirty, unchanged gloves. What else did that glove touch? The door handle that we know Sollecito touched...but was not tested by the crack scientific police?

There is also the unidentified DNA of several others on the same tiny clasp. How did those get there? Do we know 'where it was born' or the means of how that DNA got there? No. Yet there it is.
Click to expand...

So ignorant. DNA does not grow on dirt. You are thinking of bacteria.
 
Vixen said:
So ignorant. You are claiming DNA cultivates on a glove.

Sollecito's DNA is on the bra clasp hook because he placed it there.

If it were on a glove it certainly wouldn't show as a black speck.
Click to expand...

Also, the other 2-4 male DNA haplotypes must have been placed there by those unknown men.

Either that or.....

 
Vixen said:
Yup, that's how a court works. Only if you turn up in the witness box to be cross-examined can your theories about the crime be considered.
Click to expand...

Ah, er, no. You've got a minute to consider the hole in your (nonsensical) argument.
 
Vixen said:
So ignorant. You are claiming DNA cultivates on a glove.
Click to expand...

Oh, good lord. You've written some staggeringly silly things but this one takes the cake. Go back and read my post again and see if you can figure out exactly how your statement that I'm "claiming DNA cultivates on a glove" is so profoundly ridiculous. Pay special attention to the part about the gloves and touching things, specifically the door handle that Sollecito touched.

Sollecito's DNA is on the bra clasp hook because he placed it there.
Click to expand...

When are you going to learn that your saying something doesn't make it so? The experts disagree with you. That should be your first hint.

If it were on a glove it certainly wouldn't show as a black speck.
Click to expand...

Sigh. Who said it did? Just when I think you can't top yourself with ignorant comments, you do. DNA is invisible to the naked eye which is exactly why the idea of a 'selective cleanup' was so very, very stupid.
 
Stacyhs said:
Or anyone who did not testify in court! Apparently, only testifying in court gives someone expertise on a subject.
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
Yup, that's how a court works. Only if you turn up in the witness box to be cross-examined can your theories about the crime be considered.
Click to expand...

That's not what the point of the discussion was. But, once again, you apparently don't comprehend what you read very well. May we now expect you to never again mention the names of Balding or Garofano (or anyone else who did not testify in court) when it comes to this case?

By the way, that dirty gloves can contaminate evidence by transferring DNA is not a 'theory': it is an established scientific fact supported by numerous studies.
 
Vixen said:
Don't need to. Any fule 'no DNA does NOT crawl under a door and onto the murder victim's underwear.

As one of the judges put it, 'there is more chance of a meteorite striking this court'.
Click to expand...

Methos said:
Do you have a quote from the transcripts for that? Last time I looked, that "meteorite" quote was attributed to Hellmann appeal persecution expert Prof. Novelli... (not a judge) :confused:
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
That's right. His testimony was accepted.
Click to expand...

"That's right."?

What's right? That Hellmann appeal persecution expert Prof. Novelli was not a judge? Nothing new here, that's what I said...

What about my question about you having a "quote from the transcripts" for that "meteorite quote" attributed to Novelli?

Well, thanks to Stacyhs we know that Prof Novelli said that stupid thing to a newspaper a month before he said more stupid things in his actual testimony...

You said: "His testimony was accepted.", do you know, what he said? Hint: nothing about "meteorites striking courts" ;)
 
Vixen said:
That's right. His testimony was accepted.
Click to expand...

But that quote was not given as part of his testimony. It was given in a newspaper interview. So you are wrong that the quote you provided was made by a judge and during Novelli's testimony.

Pity for you that Marasca Bruno accepted the testimony of Conti and Vecchiotti regarding the contamination over Novelli.
 
Vixen said:
So ignorant. DNA does not grow on dirt. You are thinking of bacteria.
Click to expand...

Speaking of ignorant...I never said DNA grows on dirt and I am not thinking of bacteria. I spoke only of the TRANSFERENCE of DNA. I really don't know why you are having such difficulty understanding that very simple concept.

Of course, if you like, you can go back to any of my posts and quote where I ever said anything about contamination by 'cultivation' or DNA 'growing in dirt'. But we all know where that's going to end up, don't we?
 
Last edited:
Stacyhs said:
What a ridiculous statement. The source of contamination cannot always be discovered but that does not mean contamination did not occur. In the Sollecito clasp incident, it's rather obvious to anyone with more than half a brain that the clasp, found 6 weeks after the murder across the room from its original location and among other objects is not going to be in the same forensic state as it was immediately after the murder. It is visibly dirtier and 'rattier' when collected than it was when first found.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_716695daf2b34a99ee.jpg[/qimg]

Then there is the video of the collection showing it being held with dirty, unchanged gloves. What else did that glove touch? The door handle that we know Sollecito touched...but was not tested by the crack scientific police?

There is also the unidentified DNA of several others on the same tiny clasp. How did those get there? Do we know 'where it was born' or the means of how that DNA got there? No. Yet there it is.
Click to expand...

The Dec 18th, 2007 videos are worth watching (anyone interested can find them and the crimescene photos here).
I think these two snippets from the video are quite telling, when it comes to the question of "contamination"... and no, it's not the gloves ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW2u84z-xJg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=YWWH42mzurM
 
Stacyhs said:
Incredible. :eye-poppi
Click to expand...

Speaking of the only things being real are limited to those things testified to at trial, where cross examination was available....

Napoleoni testified to the Massei court that everyone who had entered the murderroom had worn forensic countermeasures......

...... except ......

The members of the medical team who'd gone in to examine the victim, in their civvies, no countermeasures.

But remember - there was no obvious route of contamination...........
 
Remember, the only things which are real are things presented at trial. The following is what the first provisionally convicting judge, Judge Massei, wrote about what he'd heard - he heard this, yet still did not consider there to be a route of contamination into the murder room:

Massei on pages 91ff said:
On the afternoon of November 2, 2007 personnel of the Perugia Police headquarters
went to said house. The 118 and Coroner Dr. Lalli also came....

Everyone who entered had gloves and shoe covers on except the 118 personnel who
certified the death.​
Click to expand...
 
Vixen said:
So ignorant. You are claiming DNA cultivates on a glove.

Sollecito's DNA is on the bra clasp hook because he placed it there.

If it were on a glove it certainly wouldn't show as a black speck.
Click to expand...

Vixen

DNA, being a fungus, often sporulates under the right conditions, such as Samhain murder rituals perpetrated by a slut, burglar, and Italian mobster.

One can often see when this happens as DNA will become visible as a black speck, much like soot, dirt, or the scale of a dragon. In fact, Amanda Knox likely used the biological spores of this DNA to brew her fatal concoction in her witch's cauldron.

It's all in the court documents if you'd like to see for yourself.
 
Last edited:
Bill Williams said:
Remember, the only things which are real are things presented at trial. The following is what the first provisionally convicting judge, Judge Massei, wrote about what he'd heard - he heard this, yet still did not consider there to be a route of contamination into the murder room:

​
Click to expand...

That couldn't possibly be the route of contamination; everyone knows DNA contamination is due to it being cultivated in dirt and then flying under the door.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom