The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 31

[Bill Williams]

The only conclusion is that the idea 'Stefanoni fiddled the results because Mignini made her do it' is the real Conspiracy Theory here.

It's impossible to tell whether or not Stefanoni fiddled. What the final judicial fact was, one of the justifications for acquittal, was that the lower court's should never have used the DNA evidence from her as a reason to convict.

Even other prosecution experts conceded that Stefanoni did not follow international protocols. Another said that because the negative controls were never made available, it was impossible to see how Stefanoni came to any of the conclusions which were presented in court.

Even if it had been true though, so said the final court, none of it justified conviction. It had nothing to do with any imaginary Conspiracy which can never be known. It was always the matter of it being junk evidence.

That's the final judicial fact that overruled any of the lower court's which found otherwise.

 

[Vixen]

The duvet with 'burglary' papers on top.

 

[Vixen]

It's impossible to tell whether or not Stefanoni fiddled. What the final judicial fact was, one of the justifications for acquittal, was that the lower court's should never have used the DNA evidence from her as a reason to convict.

Even other prosecution experts conceded that Stefanoni did not follow international protocols. Another said that because the negative controls were never made available, it was impossible to see how Stefanoni came to any of the conclusions which were presented in court.

Even if it had been true though, so said the final court, none of it justified conviction. It had nothing to do with any imaginary Conspiracy which can never be known. It was always the matter of it being junk evidence.

That's the final judicial fact that overruled any of the lower court's which found otherwise.

No, it was a junk judgment. These were just a small group of people sitting around a table. It didn't assess evidence, hear evidence or cross-examine.
All it did was listen to a skeleton argument from each party limited to 20 minutes each. It allowed Bongiorno (who was counsel for Andreotti, now a far-right politician herself) bend their ear for two and a half days. It had zero wherewithal to ascertain the evidence was junk. Vecchiotti and Conti were expungnd by Chieffi and whether or not you agreed with Chieffi Supreme Court, the Marasca-Bruno Supreme Court had no power to breathe fresh life into the corpse of Vecchiotti and Conti.


What next: a claim that the on-scene crime police photographers scattered the papers onto the duvet themselves in order to point the finger at someone who might have a motive to fake a burglary...?

 

[Numbers]

It's impossible to tell whether or not Stefanoni fiddled. What the final judicial fact was, one of the justifications for acquittal, was that the lower court's should never have used the DNA evidence from her as a reason to convict.

Even other prosecution experts conceded that Stefanoni did not follow international protocols. Another said that because the negative controls were never made available, it was impossible to see how Stefanoni came to any of the conclusions which were presented in court.

Even if it had been true though, so said the final court, none of it justified conviction. It had nothing to do with any imaginary Conspiracy which can never be known. It was always the matter of it being junk evidence.

That's the final judicial fact that overruled any of the lower court's which found otherwise.

Does this mean we don't know whether or not Stefanoni played the violin?

If one means by "fiddling" that one fails, or intentionally neglects to take, measures that assure or tend to assure the reliability of one's results, then Stefanoni was fiddling.

The exact methods including quality control and quality assurance methods must be disclosed in scientific or forensic testing. For forensic testing, the raw results and not merely the end results must be available for inspection by the defense.

Hiding or suppressing information that shows or suggests that one's forensic or scientific test results are not reliable is certainly one type of fiddling. Remember the traditional oath for testimony: to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Suppressing information on the reliability or lack thereof of one's test methodology and results is a clear violation of the obligation to disclose the whole truth.

 

[Bill Williams]

No, it was a junk judgment.

Wait a minute. It's now a judicial fact! I thought that was your method of determining truth? If a court said it, if it had become a judicial fact, then shut up about it!

What next: a claim that the on-scene crime police photographers scattered the papers onto the duvet themselves in order to point the finger at someone who might have a motive to fake a burglary...?

As per the video that the scientific police themselves took of the collection of the bra-clasp, 46 days after the crime.....

.... that's exactly what is seen - at least in relation to the bra-clasp. They located it on the floor in a different place, picked it up with obviously dirty gloves, then replaced it to yet a different place on the floor, then photographed it.

Who knows what the 'motive' was for them to be so sloppy? Was it to purposely frame someone? Absent a confession by police, one can only guess.

But the sloppy, amateurish incompetence - the police video'ed themselves demonstrating that!!!!

Conspiracy? Who knows!

 

[TruthCalls]

It was a manky old pillow covered in numerous stains. In law you cannot go on a 'fishing expedition', in other words go trawling about hoping to nail someone. That is suspect-centric and in any case, what does it have to do with Knox' and Sollecito's Nencini appeal when Guede was already convicted?

The issues were decided at the prehearing stage of the trial and it is clear neither party thought the pillow as an issue.

Semen is the holy grail of evidence in a sexual assault investigations, it's not part of a "fishing expedition", and you don't wait until people are put on trial to discuss whether something like this should be tested. If you find what might be semen you test it immediately, no questions asked. Honestly, this is so obvious that I can only conclude even you have a hard time trying to make such a ridiculous argument.

As an aside, are you now trying to claim that Meredith slept on "manky" (def: "disgusting, dirty or rotten") old pillows covered in numerous stains? That sounds rather nasty. IMHO, that's a horrible thing to suggest about Meredith just to sustain your unsustainable argument, but what do I know.

 

[TomG]

http://themurderofmeredithkercher.net/S-evidence-crime-scene.html

I meant a specific source from the proceedings. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Hoots

 

[TruthCalls]

According to Guede - who few believe but anyway - he arrived at the cottage at a predestined arrangement (unlikely given Mez mistakenly believed she had a class next day [actually, a Bank holiday] and had told her friends that she needed to finish off some reading, having borrowed a history book that she need to give back to a fellow student. Having got back around 9:00 it is hardly likely she'd want to begin a new relationship having just spent hours at a pizza party with Netflix). According to his version, Knox arrived later and Mez let him in.

Knox in her first statement to the police stated that she had met Patrik in he baseball court and they had returned to the cottage together, with the aim of his having sex with Mez. Mez fought him off and Knox claimed she heard the harrowing screams as he raped and murdered her. (NB: Patrik was entirely innocent with a verified alibi.)

So the legal facts found are tha Knox confessed to being present at the murder scene.

How about NO ONE believed him, which begs the question, why waste our time repeating it?

No, Amanda told the police numerous times she was at Raffaele's apartment the entire evening. Even during the disallowed interrogation this is what she told the police. This is why the police called her a liar and Donnino tried to convince Amanda she was suffering from traumatic amnesia. I'd say nice try, but really, it isn't.

But here's the thing. I asked the question "why would Amanda and Raffaele stage a sexual assault if they were there and knew one had already taken place" and what I find noticeably absent in your response is anything that even remotely attempts to answer the question. No surprise there.

 

[TruthCalls]

No, it was a junk judgment. These were just a small group of people sitting around a table. It didn't assess evidence, hear evidence or cross-examine.
All it did was listen to a skeleton argument from each party limited to 20 minutes each. It allowed Bongiorno (who was counsel for Andreotti, now a far-right politician herself) bend their ear for two and a half days. It had zero wherewithal to ascertain the evidence was junk. Vecchiotti and Conti were expungnd by Chieffi and whether or not you agreed with Chieffi Supreme Court, the Marasca-Bruno Supreme Court had no power to breathe fresh life into the corpse of Vecchiotti and Conti.
What next: a claim that the on-scene crime police photographers scattered the papers onto the duvet themselves in order to point the finger at someone who might have a motive to fake a burglary...?

On what basis could Chieffi expunge the C&V report, as opposed to disagree with some of it's conclusions, which is how I interpreted things. Further, what Italian law would give the Chieffi court the authority to exclude an expert report from being considered in future courts?

 

[Bill Williams]

No, it was a junk judgment. These were just a small group of people sitting around a table. It didn't assess evidence, hear evidence or cross-examine.
All it did was listen to a skeleton argument from each party limited to 20 minutes each. It allowed Bongiorno (who was counsel for Andreotti, now a far-right politician herself) bend their ear for two and a half days.... blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.....

I see. When a court agrees with you, it settles judicial facts which are not to be argued with.

When a court disagrees with you, it is junk. The data which you parse in each could not be more different. When a court convicted the pair, you accept everything the court says without comment. When a court acquitted the pair, there's always some sort of conspiracy about Mafia, etc..... it gets really tiresome, because NOWHERE to you offer citations for your blathering.

There we sit.

 

[Bill Williams]

According to Guede - who few believe but anyway - he arrived at the cottage at a predestined arrangement (unlikely given Mez mistakenly believed she had a class next day [actually, a Bank holiday] and had told her friends that she needed to finish off some reading, having borrowed a history book that she need to give back to a fellow student. Having got back around 9:00 it is hardly likely she'd want to begin a new relationship having just spent hours at a pizza party with Netflix). According to his version, Knox arrived later and Mez (the victim) let him in. Knox in her first statement to the police stated that she had met Patrik in he baseball court and they had returned to the cottage together, with the aim of his having sex with Mez. Mez fought him off and Knox claimed she heard the harrowing screams as he raped and murdered her. (NB: Patrik was entirely innocent with a verified alibi.)

So the legal facts found are tha Knox confessed to being present at the murder scene.

The sole source of the 'Knox arrived later and Mez (the victim) let him in,' was Guede, who you just said, 'few believe anyway'.

You're nothing if not inconsistent.

 

[Stacyhs]

It was a manky old pillow covered in numerous stains.

Since Giacomo Silenzi had left Perugia days before the murder on Oct 29, the stain could not have been deposited by him for several days. So, which is it? Was Meredith "fastidious" as often claimed or did she sleep on a "manky old pillow" case with unwashed semen stains for several days? Apparently, she was going to sleep on it for yet another night as it was not put into the washing machine with her other things on Nov. 1.

If the stains were Silenzi's, what are the odds that those stains on the case would just happen to be placed directly below Kercher's genitals between her legs?

This is just another example of the illogical reasoning of Stefanoni and the prosecution.

In law you cannot go on a 'fishing expedition', in other words go trawling about hoping to nail someone.

LOL! Testing a suspected semen stain found under the genitals of a rape victim is "going on a 'fishing expedition'" "hoping to nail someone"???

That is suspect-centric and in any case, what does it have to do with Knox' and Sollecito's Nencini appeal when Guede was already convicted?

You really don't see the irony in your claim that testing the stain was 'suspect centered', do you?

The issues were decided at the prehearing stage of the trial and it is clear neither party thought the pillow as an issue.

Oh, my. It was very clear that BOTH parties thought the pillow stains were an issue. The prosecution and Maresca didn't want it tested in case it didn't belong to Guede, Sollecito, or Silenzi because that would mean ANOTHER UNIDENTIFIED MAN could have killed Kercher. It's already been explained to you twice why the defense did not trust Stefanoni and later did request it be tested.

 

[Stacyhs]

According to Guede - who few believe but anyway - he arrived at the cottage at a predestined arrangement (unlikely given Mez Meredith mistakenly believed she had a class next day [actually, a Bank holiday] and had told her friends that she needed to finish off some reading, having borrowed a history book that she need to give back to a fellow student. Having got back around 9:00 it is hardly likely she'd want to begin a new relationship having just spent hours at a pizza party with Netflix). According to his version, Knox arrived later and Mez Meredith let him in.

Please stop referring to Meredith by her pet name used by friends and family. You are neither.

Knox in her first statement to the police stated that she had met Patrik in he baseball court and they had returned to the cottage together, with the aim of his having sex with Mez. Mez fought him off and Knox claimed she heard the harrowing screams as he raped and murdered her. (NB: Patrik was entirely innocent with a verified alibi.)

So the legal facts found are tha Knox confessed to being present at the murder scene.

And yet there is no evidence she actually met Patrick at the basketball court. Curatolo testified in the Massei court on the times he says he saw Amanda and Raffaele:
"MIGNINI What time was it?
CURATOLO Around 9:30, 10:00."

and again:

"MIGNINI Do you remember what time it was that you saw them?
CURATOLO I told you. I was sitting on the bench around 9:30, 10:00, and I was there until around midnight.
MIGNINI And when did you see these two kids?
CURATOLO Until before midnight when I got tired of reading, I lit a cigarette, I watched the people that went by, the movement that was in Piazza Grimana, and then I didn’t see them anymore"."

and

"BONGIORNO The two were there the entire time without interruption?
CURATOLO Yes, until before midnight, when I left, I think they were there.
BONGIORNO So they didn’t leave and come back, they were always there?
CURATOLO No. They didn’t go and come back. They were sitting there talking to each other."

In all, Curatolo claimed NINE TIMES in his testimony that Knox and Sollecito, never mentioning a Black man at all, were constantly in P. Grimana between 9:30 and midnight.
Maybe he just couldn't tell Sollecito apart from Patrick? They look so very much alike especially under the lamp where Curatolo said they were standing.

Nencini (pg 140) wrote: "according to the precise testimony of Antonio Curatolo, which the Court deems reliable for the aforementioned reasons, Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, from 9:30 pm to about midnight on Novemeber 1 2007 were noticed multiple times at Piazza Grimana.

Hmmmm...According to the prosecution, Kercher was attacked around 11:00 PM. Yet Curatolo says AK and RS are in P. Grimana until midnight.

The 'logic' of the Massei and Nencini courts is to believe Curatolo's claims that Knox was in P. Grimana, yet, at the same time, also in her kitchen hearing Kercher scream while being attacked by Lumumba.

Both cannot be true, yet those two courts irrationally believe they are.

The reason you cling so desperately to the "legal facts" is because logic and rational thinking don't support the pair's guilt.

 

[Vixen]

It's impossible to tell whether or not Stefanoni fiddled. What the final judicial fact was, one of the justifications for acquittal, was that the lower court's should never have used the DNA evidence from her as a reason to convict.

Even other prosecution experts conceded that Stefanoni did not follow international protocols. Another said that because the negative controls were never made available, it was impossible to see how Stefanoni came to any of the conclusions which were presented in court.

Even if it had been true though, so said the final court, none of it justified conviction. It had nothing to do with any imaginary Conspiracy which can never be known. It was always the matter of it being junk evidence.

That's the final judicial fact that overruled any of the lower court's which found otherwise.

This is utter nonsense. What the 'other prosecution experts' your refer to include are a hotch-potch of US armchair lawyers who like to reference their source as 'The Wisconsin Police Handbook. Fact is, Italy is a founder member of EFTI who set the standards which did differ from the USA by a few picograms. As an example, the UK minimum number of alleles for legal standards in a criminal trial is 10, in Italy, eleven. Despite the Low Copy Number of the DNA found on the knife blade (collected by a completely different team at Sollecito's bedsit) nonetheless the PCR amplification, as witnessed by the defence forensic expert Torricelli and for the parents Patumi, threw up a near full profile of 15 pairs of alleles of Kercher and the RFU's were clear. Not something that can be faked. The defence expert witness did not make any complaint about Stefanoni's methods and in fact it was seen a semi miraculous, like Mez calling from the grave.

The profile on the bra hook was a maximum of 17 alleles (which can be highlighted) of Sollecito's and this was not LCN. There were 80 picograms and Italy's legal minumum before classed as LCN was 50 at the time. Just because some state in the USA stipulate 100 as the minimum, doesn't mean this was the 'international standard', just US defence guns-for-hire looking for loopholes to get their champions off the hook.

As for 'negative controls, Vecchiotti and Conti were forced to admit under oath that Stefanoni HAD handed them over and via the Court so there are no two ways about it.

 

[Vixen]

Does this mean we don't know whether or not Stefanoni played the violin?

If one means by "fiddling" that one fails, or intentionally neglects to take, measures that assure or tend to assure the reliability of one's results, then Stefanoni was fiddling.

The exact methods including quality control and quality assurance methods must be disclosed in scientific or forensic testing. For forensic testing, the raw results and not merely the end results must be available for inspection by the defense.

Hiding or suppressing information that shows or suggests that one's forensic or scientific test results are not reliable is certainly one type of fiddling. Remember the traditional oath for testimony: to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Suppressing information on the reliability or lack thereof of one's test methodology and results is a clear violation of the obligation to disclose the whole truth.

It's lucky that Stefanoni is a professional scientist, objective and impartial and only interested in achieving scientific results by scientific methods and as expressed by scientific statistics as to the probability of her results being random. In addition, it is statutory to allow the defence expert witness to observe the proceedings.

 

[Vixen]

Semen is the holy grail of evidence in a sexual assault investigations, it's not part of a "fishing expedition", and you don't wait until people are put on trial to discuss whether something like this should be tested. If you find what might be semen you test it immediately, no questions asked. Honestly, this is so obvious that I can only conclude even you have a hard time trying to make such a ridiculous argument.

As an aside, are you now trying to claim that Meredith slept on "manky" (def: "disgusting, dirty or rotten") old pillows covered in numerous stains? That sounds rather nasty. IMHO, that's a horrible thing to suggest about Meredith just to sustain your unsustainable argument, but what do I know.

I suggest you look up the definition of 'rape'. It is not something that happens outwith the body of the victim.


It was grotty rented student accommodation. Who knows how many people have slept on the same bed and bedding?

As Nencini's court reasoned, even if you do have a DNA profile, how do you date it? If Sollecito's, he'll just claim it happened another time.

 

[Bill Williams]

I suggest you look up the definition of 'rape'. It is not something that happens outwith the body of the victim.


It was grotty rented student accommodation. Who knows how many people have slept on the same bed and bedding?

As Nencini's court reasoned, even if you do have a DNA profile, how do you date it? If Sollecito's, he'll just claim it happened another time.

It's weird to read a post unburdened by sense.

 

[Vixen]

I meant a specific source from the proceedings. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

Hoots

From:

Number 8 of 2008: RG Court of Assizes
Number 9077 of [20]07: RG Notice of crime Public Prosecutor

Republic of Italy
In the name of the Italian people

The Court of Assizes of Perugia composed of Their Honours

Dr Giancarlo Massei, President, and Extensor
Dr Beatrice Cristiani, Judge, and Extensor
Anna Maria Artegiani, Lay Judge
Giuliano Menichetti, Lay Judge
Maria Ludovica Morelli, Lay Judge
Angela Irene Ceccarini, Lay Judge
Andrea Valentini, Lay Judge
Palo Rapetti, Lay Judge

pronounced and published on December 4 and 5, 2009

Why the burglary happened AFTER the murder:

The itinerary that the phantom burglar would have taken, entering via the breaking of the window and window-pane, has already been mentioned: Romanelli’s room; the living room space crossed to go into the larger bathroom in which he left his sign of usage by not flushing; exit from the larger bathroom; another passage through [161] the living room to go along the hall and enter into Meredith’s room. If it were so, one is unable to comprehend how it was possible that a piece of glass was dragged from Romanelli’s room in various places and made to arrive in Meredith’s room. It is more logical to think that, after the simulation of the burglary and the breaking of the window, the person who did this went into Meredith’s room – to close the door and/or to cover her lifeless body with the duvet – and the glass fragment – which could have ended up, hypothetically, in a fold of the clothing being worn or in some other place – came to fall, or rather it came to be brought in Meredith’s room, into which, immediately after the breaking of the glass, it was carried by whoever broke that glass.

See exhibit Q, a postcard scattered on the floor of Filomena's room as part of the 'burglary' scene.

Finally, Exhibit 68 was examined, constituting two prints (photo 16 letter Q) discovered on a postcard found in Filomena Romanelli’s room, and the size 9 prints found in Meredith’s room on a paper-like material (photos 17-21).

and

Furthermore, they possessed three footprints taken from the accused on the date 12.05.08, during the course of a physical examination, and of the prints, already examined [361] during the course of the preceding technical investigation, made up of: photo 14, corresponding to Exhibit 105 on Meredith’s pillow-case; photo 16 (postcard from Romanelli’s room); photos 17-21 (nine prints on paper-like material in Meredith’s room).

and

[360]
• Exhibit Q (Romanelli’s room): two prints left by the superimposition of dust on a postcard were found. Print number 1, left by a right shoe and the sole useful for negative comparisons, was not produced by any of the shoes tested
• photo 17/21 (Meredith Kercher’s room) prints on paper-like material: these were not produced by the shoes tested.
-

Massei concludes re the mise-en-scène:

Amanda Knox, just for such a circumstance (she was the only one, except Meredith, who had the keys to the front door of the house) needed to distance from herself every suspicion, and therefore together with Raffaele Sollecito, with whom she was staying, as will be said in due course, organised the scenario of the broken window pane, the disorder in the room of Romanelli Filomena with the aim of derailing the investigations and directing them towards the person who, not having the house keys, had to look for another way of getting in: breaking a pane and getting through the window.
[49] Against any such need to dissimulate, which Amanda would have had, it has been argued that the aim of sexual violence which the crime appeared to display (the victim was a young girl and her body was almost completely naked and was in her own bedroom) should have removed all suspicion from Amanda.

Q.E.D.::

 

[Vixen]

How about NO ONE believed him, which begs the question, why waste our time repeating it?

No, Amanda told the police numerous times she was at Raffaele's apartment the entire evening. Even during the disallowed interrogation this is what she told the police. This is why the police called her a liar and Donnino tried to convince Amanda she was suffering from traumatic amnesia. I'd say nice try, but really, it isn't.

But here's the thing. I asked the question "why would Amanda and Raffaele stage a sexual assault if they were there and knew one had already taken place" and what I find noticeably absent in your response is anything that even remotely attempts to answer the question. No surprise there.

Unfortunately for your story, police phone log retrievals placed her near the basketball court and not 'home all night'. Even Sollecito told the police she was out until 1:00am. Or perhaps you can explain why you think Guede is a liar but Sollecito is not, or Knox, despite scientific evidence that their movements are not what they say on the tin.

 

[Vixen]

On what basis could Chieffi expunge the C&V report, as opposed to disagree with some of it's conclusions, which is how I interpreted things. Further, what Italian law would give the Chieffi court the authority to exclude an expert report from being considered in future courts?

Chieffi sent it to Nencini Appeal court with the directions to re-examine C&V's testimony and it was found to be a crock. They lied about the DNA near the blade being 'too LCN' to test.


Couple of crooks.