Cont: The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 32

[Stacyhs]

Here's some of Mignini's summing up of the knife wounds.

"In summary it is a common household knife, with a sturdy structure with a quadrilateral handle that allows an easy power take-off, a sharp point and a very sharp blade even if not perfectly smooth, all features that allow to affirm its full usability in a violent action like that of the case of Meredith Kercher. The comparison between the type of wounds and the type of blade certainly make it possible to consider the former as fully compatible with the damaging action of the latter.

It should also be emphasized, in relation to some notations raised by one of the parties on the slight tortuosity and the presence of incisions of the greater wound that are referred to the action of the blade and also on the irregularity of the channel, referred to a multiple traumatized action, that the same characteristics can be attributed respectively to the plication of the cutaneous planes, very mobile with respect to the deep ones, in the neck region, and to the reciprocal movements of the aggressor and the victim in the agitation of aggression.

To conclude on this point, it is believed that the damage found is perfectly compatible with the damaging potential of the examined knife, therefore the judgment of "non incompatibility" expressed by the experts of the GIP should be more correctly read as a judgment of clear "compatibility". (see rel. on p. 16).

"The phenomenological interpretation of the complex of lesions allows us to affirm that the victim reported bruises and wounds from a point and cut during the aggression" The first for the presented characteristics refer to violent grasping, being therefore able to exclude the use of means blunt instruments other than hands. In particular, the ecchymoses present in the perioral region are compatible with a violent manual compressive action to which the damage on the mucous membrane of the lips deriving from the "clearing" of the soft tissues against the tooth surface and also reliably facilitated by the action of rubbing derived from the victim's movements. The ecchymoses in the mandibular region represent clear digitized fingerprints of a hand that grips this anatomical region with force.

Their overall evaluation makes it possible to believe that the victim suffered attempts at suffocation and strangulation, the latter of which can be inferred mainly from the ecchymoses typed in the mandibular-submandibular region. The fracture of the hyoid bone, although not, can be correlated with this phase and mode of aggression

being able to exclude absolutely, as pointed out by the experts, its derivation from the action of the cutting edge due to the characteristics (flute beak fracture with sharp edges).

The other ecchymotic lesions detected in the upper and lower limbs cannot but be attributed the meaning of attempts, by grasping to immobilize the victim. Next to the damaging painting of a contusive type is the one derived from the action of a pointed knife and with a single-cutting blade that caused, in at least two, a sufficiently deep passage to discontinue an arterial vessel (upper right thyroid artery) and the upper airway in the pharyngeal tract. ”(see CT on pp. 17 and 18).

He also says elsewhere in the closing submissions:

We are not having a retrial here, so there is no point in your bringing up Mignini's closing argument in the Massei trial.

Mignini said a lot of things that proved false.

 

[TruthCalls]

To be clear, the following is the clip from the twenty-minute long forensically reconstructed video prosecutor Comodi showed the judges and jury, using only material presented in the evidence file. None of it is guesswork. RS is said to be standing to the left of AK. (The figures in the pic are anonymised as stock figures, possibly the police stand-ins.)


View attachment 61024

Source: Murder of Meredith Kercher com https://themurderofmeredithkercher.net/S-evidence-wounds.html

• 2009-05-27-Slides-Scientific-Police-UACV-model-assault-3D.pdf (WARNING: very graphic ~ Vixen)

So what was the point of posting the YT screen grab if you knew it was grossly wrong? I'll tell you... you're trying to argue the room wasn't too small for four people to carry out a violent assault and you thought that picture helped your cause. What it ended up doing is either (A) show that you use deception (we already knew that...) or (B) you didn't know it was wrong, in which case, shame on you for making such shoddy arguments.

As for this picture, it's still grossly out of scale. According to the SP measured diagram of Meredith's bedroom, the "useful area" for the space between the wardrobe and the desk is 130 cm (4.2 feet). This drawing is showing four people in what would be roughly a 4 foot square area. Sorry, but that's not accurately depicted here. Here's another view from this document;



Meredith was 163 cm tall. So her head would be up against the wardrobe and her feet up against the desk. Yet in the picture you posted her head is well away from the wardrobe and her feet no where near the desk. This is NOT an accurate depiction, and you can claim otherwise all you want but it isn't going to change anything. This was a fantasy cartoon, and the last thing they appeared to be concerned with is accuracy.

Again, one more time... per the Scientific Police, the "Useful Area" in Meredith's bedroom was 5.2 x 4.2 feet. That would be a tight fit for two people to be engaged in a violent assault, but four just won't fit, and they certainly wouldn't have been able to prevent leaving a forensic trace just as Guede did. Delude yourself all you want, but I don't think you're going to win any converts here.

BTW, I'm still waiting for you to concede the furniture was not in Meredith's bedroom when the jurors came to visit the cottage, and therefore your comment that the jurors had plenty of room was, once again, a deceptive comment.

 

[Stacyhs]

Whether the room was big enough for 4 people to be involved in the attack is not really the point. The point is that it is impossible for 2 of 3 attackers to leave no evidence of themselves in such a small space while only the third person left multiple pieces of forensic evidence. The rest is just a red herring.

 

[TruthCalls]

Whether the room was big enough for 4 people to be involved in the attack is not really the point. The point is that it is impossible for 2 of 3 attackers to leave no evidence of themselves in such a small space while only the third person left multiple pieces of forensic evidence. The rest is just a red herring.

Exactly, and that IS the point. Even if you can squeeze four people in there, it was a violent assault and very bloody... as Marasca points out, it's simply not possible for two of them to leave no forensic trace. It's just that the PGP aren't really very concerned with common sense.

Also, regarding the knife, the important thing to remember is that there was NO evidence that ALL wounds could not have been made by the same, smaller knife, a knife that would also be a perfect match for the imprint made in blood on the bed sheet.

I also found Mignini's comment very misguided. Specifically, he said "It is hardly necessary to add that there was no evidence to the contrary about the fact that the knife was in the availability of Sollecito and that it was used in the house of Via della Pergola 7, ie in that of Meredith. Also on this point, the decree of the First Section of the Supreme Court is now definitive and cannot be changed."

Well yes, Mignini, there is. Only one wound could have possibly been made by the kitchen knife, but even the forensic experts pointed out the depth of the wound being less than half the length of the blade is very unlikely as assailants don't 'insert' knives gently. Further, as pointed out in the autopsy, there was bruising around the perimeter of the wound consistent with the hilt striking it. Massei came up with a ridiculous explanation for looking the other way, but it clearly was not involved in the murder.

 

[Numbers]

proscoglimento refers to Article 529

The term "proscioglimento" (=translates as "acquittal") is normally used if a case is "struck out" during a pre-trial hearing (Art. 529). The judges Marasca and Bruno used the term "proscioglimento" in their motivations report instead of "assoluzione" and that it is an acquittal per Art 530.2 cpp, the same as "proscioglimento": insufficient probable cause (or insufficient Reasonable Prospect of Success, the UK CPS criterion) - which of course, at the Supreme Court stage, is not about weighing up evidence. It is about ensuring everything has been done constitutionally and within the framework of the law, as per statute handed down by the government.


It is, of course, a self-evident absurdity and tautology to say that a case that has gone all the way up to Stage 3, Supreme Court, has 'insufficient evidence'.

Very obviously Bongiorno worked her backchannelling contacts here.

Vixen, is it reading comprehension issues or an instance on never admitting to an error - or is it just lies?

Here is CPP Article 529 in Italian. The word "proscoglimento" does NOT occur in the Italian text.

Art. 529.
Sentenza di non doversi procedere. ​

1. Se l'azione penale non doveva essere iniziata o non deve essere proseguita, il giudice pronuncia sentenza di non doversi procedere indicandone la causa nel dispositivo.

2. Il giudice provvede nello stesso modo quando la prova dell'esistenza di una condizione di procedibilità è insufficiente o contraddittoria.

As I have posted previously, the legal term proscioglimento appears in the Section (Sezione) heading for CPP Articles 529 through and including 532. The next Section (Sezione) heading has the legal term condanna in the heading for CPP Articles 533 through and including 537-bis.

Here's the structure of Book 7, Title 3, Chapter 2 (Capo II) up to and including Chapter 3 (Capo III) of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure:

Capo II
Decisione

Sezione I Sentenza di proscioglimento
[CPP Articles 529 through and including 532]


Sezione II Sentenza di condanna
[CPP Articles 533 through and including 537-bis]


Sezione III Decisione sulle questioni civili
[CPP Articles 538 through and including 543]

Capo III
Atti successivi alla deliberazione

[No Sections; CPP Articles 544 through and including 548]
Source: https://www.altalex.com/documents/news/2014/09/03/giudizio-sentenza

 

[Vixen]

So what was the point of posting the YT screen grab if you knew it was grossly wrong? I'll tell you... you're trying to argue the room wasn't too small for four people to carry out a violent assault and you thought that picture helped your cause. What it ended up doing is either (A) show that you use deception (we already knew that...) or (B) you didn't know it was wrong, in which case, shame on you for making such shoddy arguments.

As for this picture, it's still grossly out of scale. According to the SP measured diagram of Meredith's bedroom, the "useful area" for the space between the wardrobe and the desk is 130 cm (4.2 feet). This drawing is showing four people in what would be roughly a 4 foot square area. Sorry, but that's not accurately depicted here. Here's another few from this document;

View attachment 61100

Meredith was 163 cm tall. So her head would be up against the wardrobe and her feet up against the desk. Yet in the picture you posted her head is well away from the wardrobe and her feet no where near the desk. This is NOT an accurate depiction, and you can claim otherwise all you want but it isn't going to change anything. This was a fantasy cartoon, and the last thing they appeared to be concerned with is accuracy.

Again, one more time... per the Scientific Police, the "Useful Area" in Meredith's bedroom was 5.2 x 4.2 feet. That would be a tight fit for two people to be engaged in a violent assault, but four just won't fit, and they certainly wouldn't have been able to prevent leaving a forensic trace just as Guede did. Delude yourself all you want, but I don't think you're going to win any converts here.

BTW, I'm still waiting for you to concede the furniture was not in Meredith's bedroom when the jurors came to visit the cottage, and therefore your comment that the jurors had plenty of room was, once again, a deceptive comment.

From the same report, this shows the forensic police did carefully measure every aspect of the room.



Only a few frames have been released to the public domain. The actual video presentation lasted twenty minutes.


Do you really believe Perugia is some backwater town in a third world country that made all of this detail up?




.

 

[Vixen]

Exactly, and that IS the point. Even if you can squeeze four people in there, it was a violent assault and very bloody... as Marasca points out, it's simply not possible for two of them to leave no forensic trace. It's just that the PGP aren't really very concerned with common sense.

Also, regarding the knife, the important thing to remember is that there was NO evidence that ALL wounds could not have been made by the same, smaller knife, a knife that would also be a perfect match for the imprint made in blood on the bed sheet.

I also found Mignini's comment very misguided. Specifically, he said "It is hardly necessary to add that there was no evidence to the contrary about the fact that the knife was in the availability of Sollecito and that it was used in the house of Via della Pergola 7, ie in that of Meredith. Also on this point, the decree of the First Section of the Supreme Court is now definitive and cannot be changed."

Well yes, Mignini, there is. Only one wound could have possibly been made by the kitchen knife, but even the forensic experts pointed out the depth of the wound being less than half the length of the blade is very unlikely as assailants don't 'insert' knives gently. Further, as pointed out in the autopsy, there was bruising around the perimeter of the wound consistent with the hilt striking it. Massei came up with a ridiculous explanation for looking the other way, but it clearly was not involved in the murder.

You still haven't understood that DNA evidence is perfectly solid. Mez' 15-allele profile was found on the blade and Prof Torre for Sollecito was the independent expert witness for the defence who watched the PCR examination.


You are in denial if you cannot accept there is no way Mez' DNA could have been on that knife without her coming into contact with it.


The idea Stefanoni tried to frame AK and RS is ridiculous.


.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen, is it reading comprehension issues or an instance on never admitting to an error - or is it just lies?

Here is CPP Article 529 in Italian. The word "proscoglimento" does NOT occur in the Italian text.


As I have posted previously, the legal term proscioglimento appears in the Section (Sezione) heading for CPP Articles 529 through and including 532. The next Section (Sezione) heading has the legal term condanna in the heading for CPP Articles 533 through and including 537-bis.

Here's the structure of Book 7, Title 3, Chapter 2 (Capo II) up to and including Chapter 3 (Capo III) of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure:

Capo II
Decisione

Sezione I Sentenza di proscioglimento
[CPP Articles 529 through and including 532]


Sezione II Sentenza di condanna
[CPP Articles 533 through and including 537-bis]


Sezione III Decisione sulle questioni civili
[CPP Articles 538 through and including 543]

Capo III
Atti successivi alla deliberazione

[No Sections; CPP Articles 544 through and including 548]
Source: https://www.altalex.com/documents/news/2014/09/03/giudizio-sentenza

But Marasca Bruno's Motivational Report does use the word

Following the considerations above, it is obvious that a remand [rinvio] would be useless, hence the declaration of annulment without remand, based on art. 620 L) of the procedure code, thus we apply an acquittal [proscioglimento *] formula [see note just below] which a further judge on remand would be anyway compelled to apply, to abide to the principles of law established in this current sentence. [Translator’s note: The Italian word for “acquittal” is actually “assoluzione”; while the term “proscioglimento” instead, in the Italian Procedure Code, actually refers only to non-definitive preliminary judgements during investigation phase, and it could be translated as “dropping of charges”. Note: as for investigation phase “proscioglimento” is normally meant as a not-binding decision, not subjected to double jeopardy, since it is not considered a judgement nor a court’s decision.] The annulment of the verdict of conviction of Ms. Knox as for the crime written at letter A), implies the ruling out of the aggravation of teleological nexus as for the art. 61 par. 2 Penal Code.

<snip>

. THEREFORE According to article 620 lett. a) of the code of criminal procedure, it is annulled without appeal the challenged sentence in relation to the crime of paragraph b) of the rubric for being extinct for prescription; according to articles 620 lett. I) and 530, chapter 2 of the code of criminal procedure, in relation to the crime of slender, annuls without appeal the challenged sentence in relation to the crime of paragraph a), d) and e) of the rubric for having not committed the act. It is restated the inflicted sentence against the appellant Amanda Marie Knox, for the crime of slander at three years of prison. Thus the court has decided the 27th of March, 2015 Reporting Judge The president Paolo Antonio Bruno Gennaro Marasca Registered the 7th of September 2015 COURT OFFICIAL Carmela Lanzuise

.

 

[Stacyhs]

You still haven't understood that DNA evidence is perfectly solid. Mez' 15-allele profile was found on the blade and Prof Torre for Sollecito was the independent expert witness for the defence who watched the PCR examination.

You make this claim all the time yet several of those allele peaks were too low to be considered reliable. As Prof. Peter Gill wrote:

The amplified DNA product in sample B was also subjected to capillary gel electrophoresis. The electrophoretic graph showed peaks that were below the reporting threshold and allele imbalance at most loci. I counted only 6 alleles that were above the reporting threshold. The electrophoretic graph showed a partial DNA profile that was claimed to match Meredith Kercher. Consequently, sample B was borderline for interpretation. For LT-DNA analysis, it is preferable to carry out duplicate testing [29,30] but the sample was not divided in order to carry out this procedure, hence the results of the analysis were not verified by re-amplification. Based on my own review of the electrophoretic graphs, the evidence only weakly supported the Prosecution’s claim that the partial DNA profile belongs to Kercher.

But what does Gill know about DNA analysis? Oh, wait...like all experts not supporting the guilt narrative, he's "bent".

You are in denial if you cannot accept there is no way Mez' DNA could have been on that knife without her coming into contact with it.

I'm not the one in denial here. I don't ignore the findings of several forensic experts all with more education, training, and experience than Stefanoni.

The idea Stefanoni tried to frame AK and RS is ridiculous.

I don't think she tried to frame them. But she undoubtedly violated testing protocols and ignored all the "too low" results several times.

 

[Stacyhs]

But Marasca Bruno's Motivational Report does use the word

[Translator’s note: The Italian word for “acquittal” is actually “assoluzione”; while the term “proscioglimento” instead, in the Italian Procedure Code, actually refers only to non-definitive preliminary judgements during investigation phase, and it could be translated as “dropping of charges”. Note: as for investigation phase “proscioglimento” is normally meant as a not-binding decision, not subjected to double jeopardy, since it is not considered a judgement nor a court’s decision.

Have you considered that the translator is just wrong?

prosciogliménto n. [from the Latin proscolure ] – The act of absolving, liberation: e.g. from an obligation , from a bond , from a vow . In criminal proceedings, a sentence of p. , that of not having to proceed or of acquittal issued by the judge of the trial. In the elementary school system, before the Gentile reform, the exam of p . was called the exam taken at the end of the third year, which absolved one from the strictest scholastic obligation.

 

[Numbers]

But Marasca Bruno's Motivational Report does use the word

1. [Translator’s note: The Italian word for “acquittal” is actually “assoluzione”; while the term “proscioglimento” instead, in the Italian Procedure Code, actually refers only to non-definitive preliminary judgements during investigation phase, and it could be translated as “dropping of charges”. Note: as for investigation phase “proscioglimento” is normally meant as a not-binding decision, not subjected to double jeopardy, since it is not considered a judgement nor a court’s decision.]

2. THEREFORE According to article 620 lett. a) of the code of criminal procedure, it is annulled without appeal the challenged sentence in relation to the crime of paragraph b) of the rubric for being extinct for prescription; according to articles 620 lett. I) and 530, chapter 2 of the code of criminal procedure .....

Obviously, the translator was incorrect in the items in your post that I have identified in excerpts numbered 1 and 2. Italian legal terminology must be translated with some care and attention to detail to get the full meaning in English.

For 1, the Italian word proscioglimento has three possible meanings in English: acquittal, exoneration, or dismissal according to Collins Reverso.*
In the relevant part of the CPP, it could be translated as part of a phrase: Section I Judgment of acquittal, according to Reverso Context**. However, a better translation of the legal meaning would be: Section 1 Judgments Requiring Dismissal of Charges, because each of CPP Articles 529 (trial should not have begun or should not be continued), 530 (acquittal), and 531 (the offense was extinguished - for example, the Italian parliament passes a new law invalidating the crime) require that the charges be dismissed.

Further, the earliest type of dismissal by a judge is under CPP Article 129, which does not use the word proscioglimento. The Italian text of that article is as follows:

Art. 129.
Obbligo della immediata declaratoria di determinate cause di non punibilità.​

1. In ogni stato e grado del processo, il giudice, il quale riconosce che il fatto non sussiste o che l'imputato non lo ha commesso o che il fatto non costituisce reato o non è previsto dalla legge come reato ovvero che il reato è estinto o che manca una condizione di procedibilità, lo dichiara di ufficio con sentenza.

2. Quando ricorre una causa di estinzione del reato ma dagli atti risulta evidente che il fatto non sussiste o che l'imputato non lo ha commesso o che il fatto non costituisce reato o non è previsto dalla legge come reato, il giudice pronuncia sentenza di assoluzione o di non luogo a procedere con la formula prescritta.

Google translated:

Art. 129.
Obligation of immediate declaration of certain causes of non-punishability.​

1. At every stage and level of the trial, the judge, who recognizes that the fact does not exist or that the defendant did not commit it or that the fact does not constitute a crime or is not provided for by law as a crime or that the crime is extinguished or that a condition of admissibility is missing, declares it ex officio with a judgment.

2. When a cause of extinction of the crime occurs but it is evident from the documents that the fact does not exist or that the defendant did not commit it or that the fact does not constitute a crime or is not provided for by law as a crime, the judge pronounces a sentence of acquittal or of no case to proceed with the prescribed formula.

2. Note in this part that the translator shows that the text of the Marasca CSC panel MR includes the words "according to articles 620 lett. I) and 530, chapter 2. The translator has made a mistake in the last part of this phrase; the wording should be "530, paragraph 2" - that is, the MR states plainly that this is an ACQUITTAL under CPP Article 530 paragraph 2. This contradicts the false statement by the translator in excerpt 1. The translator was most likely biased and lying.
Source: https://www.altalex.com/documents/news/2010/09/22/atti-e-provvedimenti-del-giudice

 

[Numbers]

You make this claim all the time yet several of those allele peaks were too low to be considered reliable. As Prof. Peter Gill wrote:


But what does Gill know about DNA analysis? Oh, wait...like all experts not supporting the guilt narrative, he's "bent".

I'm not the one in denial here. I don't ignore the findings of several forensic experts all with more education, training, and experience than Stefanoni.


I don't think she tried to frame them. But she undoubtedly violated testing protocols and ignored all the "too low" results several times.

Now, Stefanoni was not conducting research under US government funding. But consider the legal term "research misconduct":

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.

(a) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.

(b) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.

(c) Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

(d) Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

Here's the legal citation from the Code of (US) Federal Regulations:

§ 93.234 Research misconduct.

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

And then there is forensic lab misconduct, as discussed in Simply Forensic*:

Forensic misconduct has become a critical issue in the criminal justice system, casting a shadow over numerous high-profile cases and leading to wrongful convictions. The mishandling of forensic evidence, whether due to incompetence, negligence, or deliberate tampering, has had a profound impact on the lives of innocent individuals and has eroded public trust in the legal process. This troubling phenomenon has sparked debates about the reliability of forensic techniques and the need for stricter oversight in forensic laboratories.

The Knox - Sollecito case is one specific example; here's the first paragraph of that part of the article:

The Amanda Knox Case: DNA Contamination and Mishandling​

The Amanda Knox case stands as a prime example of forensic misconduct and its devastating consequences. The investigation into the murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy, was marred by a series of critical errors in evidence collection, handling, and analysis. These mistakes ultimately led to the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, highlighting the importance of proper forensic procedures in criminal investigations.

From the outset, the crime scene was compromised. Police officers entered Kercher’s room without proper protective clothing, potentially contaminating crucial evidence. Video footage later revealed that items at the scene had been moved, creating new bloodstains and further compromising the integrity of the evidence. This mishandling of the crime scene made it difficult to accurately reconstruct the events surrounding the murder.

One of the most contentious pieces of evidence was a knife recovered from Sollecito’s kitchen, which prosecutors claimed was the murder weapon. However, forensic analysis of the knife was riddled with problems. The laboratory conducting the tests was not certified to perform the advanced DNA analysis techniques used in the case. Initially, the knife tested negative for blood, but investigators claimed it had been bleached. This assertion was later disproven when the substance [claimed to be human tissue cells, IIRC] on the knife was identified as potato starch.

The bra clasp belonging to the victim became another focal point of the investigation. It was collected weeks after the initial crime scene search and had been handled by several police investigators before being properly bagged as evidence. This delay and mishandling raised serious concerns about potential contamination.

* https://simplyforensic.com/unveiling-forensic-misconduct-high-profile-cases-that-shaped-justice/

 

[Vixen]

You make this claim all the time yet several of those allele peaks were too low to be considered reliable. As Prof. Peter Gill wrote:


But what does Gill know about DNA analysis? Oh, wait...like all experts not supporting the guilt narrative, he's "bent".

I'm not the one in denial here. I don't ignore the findings of several forensic experts all with more education, training, and experience than Stefanoni.


I don't think she tried to frame them. But she undoubtedly violated testing protocols and ignored all the "too low" results several times.

Do you not understand how a criminal trial works? Peter Gill was paid by the defence to write all of that. Gill's claims were never part of the trial. He was never cross-examined and his claims were never tested. Most importantly, Gill never had access to primary material that made up the evidence files. He got his information secondhand from Conti & Vecchiotti who were excoriated by the Italian Supreme Court (Chieffi) as improper and impermissible. Prof Torre is far more eminent and respected than a tinpot FOAK scientist misguidedly championing for the release of an 'innocent' and misusing his credentials to to try to bring this about. All of the experts who gave testimony in court for the prosecution, Torrecellli, Novelli, Stefanoni (whom Chieffi said was perfectly good) concurred the DNA evidence on the knife was sound. Under article 360 IIRC Stefanoni was statutorily obliged to perform one test - in front of expert Torre for RS (AK didn't bother to send an expert defence witness) a PCR - of which the results are ALL done by computer so simply not possible to 'fiddle' them. As for the false claim of 'too low' that again is a meaningless notation an uneducated ignorant person spotted in some notes and decided to try to put it forward as proof the test was null and void. In addition, the claim the defence never received the raw data is also a blatant lie, as the courts confirmed Stafanoni DID lodge all the papers with the court, which is the correct process.




.

 

[Vixen]

But Marasca Bruno's Motivational Report does use the word



Have you considered that the translator is just wrong?

The translator is an Italian legal expert AFAIAA.



.

 

[Numbers]

The translator is an Italian legal expert AFAIAA.

See my post #4171. The translator was wrong on several legal and translation points. These were not minor "errors". The impression is that the translator was an amateur with little knowledge of Italian law who lied to back up a biased view of the Marasca CSC panel MR statements.

 

[TruthCalls]

From the same report, this shows the forensic police did carefully measure every aspect of the room.

View attachment 61101

Only a few frames have been released to the public domain. The actual video presentation lasted twenty minutes.


Do you really believe Perugia is some backwater town in a third world country that made all of this detail up?

What part of 5.2' x 4.2' of "Useful Area" are you missing? I don't care about the cartoon... it was Mignini's fantasy of what happened, nothing more.

How does pointing out a small room equate to me thinking Perugia is some backwater town in a third world country? You go off on some really bizarre directions sometimes.

 

[TruthCalls]

You still haven't understood that DNA evidence is perfectly solid. Mez' 15-allele profile was found on the blade and Prof Torre for Sollecito was the independent expert witness for the defence who watched the PCR examination.


You are in denial if you cannot accept there is no way Mez' DNA could have been on that knife without her coming into contact with it.


The idea Stefanoni tried to frame AK and RS is ridiculous.

No, the DNA evidence was hardly "perfectly solid". What we know about the knife is....

• Improper chain of custody. Opening the sealed envelope in the police station was a complete fail.
• Sample 36B was identical to 36C, yet Stefanoni listed 36B positive and 36C as negative, with no explanation for doing so.
• Sample 36B tested negative for blood, for human species and for DNA
• The sample was over-amplified, violating protocols.
• The sample was tested only once, which means the results can not be considered reliable.
• The knife was completely devoid of blood. It's not possible to remove all the blood and still leave DNA.
• The wound was not a good forensic fit for the knife, as stated numerous times.

You're in denial if you choose to ignore all these facts and still think the results are solid. And no, I did not say Stefanoni tried to frame them. What I am saying is Mignini needed a way to link Amanda to the crime, and so I believe Stefanoni's goal was to find that link no matter what. The lab results she got on 36B was all she needed to know nothing was there, yet there she was, stubbornly over-amplifying the sample, desperate to find something.

 

[Vixen]

What part of 5.2' x 4.2' of "Useful Area" are you missing? I don't care about the cartoon... it was Mignini's fantasy of what happened, nothing more.

How does pointing out a small room equate to me thinking Perugia is some backwater town in a third world country? You go off on some really bizarre directions sometimes.

Because I am assuming that if the diagram of the room was drawn up by the prosecutors of say, Kohberger, you would take it for granted they would fulfill their duty of care, and probably years of post-grad training, to draw it accurately. So why would you doubt the Perugia forensic police are able to depict the crime scene accurately and are somehow cheating? According to the stated theory, it's all to please the omnipotent Mignini, the puppet master behind the false charges and convictions. For this theory to work you'd have to accept that Perugia police are somehow a third-world republic where things are sorted by corruption and bribery.



.

 

[Vixen]

No, the DNA evidence was hardly "perfectly solid". What we know about the knife is....

• Improper chain of custody. Opening the sealed envelope in the police station was a complete fail.
• Sample 36B was identical to 36C, yet Stefanoni listed 36B positive and 36C as negative, with no explanation for doing so.
• Sample 36B tested negative for blood, for human species and for DNA
• The sample was over-amplified, violating protocols.
• The sample was tested only once, which means the results can not be considered reliable.
• The knife was completely devoid of blood. It's not possible to remove all the blood and still leave DNA.
• The wound was not a good forensic fit for the knife, as stated numerous times.

You're in denial if you choose to ignore all these facts and still think the results are solid. And no, I did not say Stefanoni tried to frame them. What I am saying is Mignini needed a way to link Amanda to the crime, and so I believe Stefanoni's goal was to find that link no matter what. The lab results she got on 36B was all she needed to know nothing was there, yet there she was, stubbornly over-amplifying the sample, desperate to find something.

But it was fulfilling the standards of CPP Art 360 iirc, which states that where there is a small amount of DNA material, it must be witnessed by all parties, who are invited to send expert witness along to observe the potential one-off incident. And this is what happened. AK failing to send an expert witness as was obligatory by law, doesn't mean they can later claim an error on the part of the analyst who performed the one -off test. But Prof Torre was there for RS, and he did not raise any objections whatsoever to the testing and he was one of Italy's leading DNA experts.

Conti & Vecchiotti OTOH refused to perform the analysis of the third sample from the knife, probably because they had already done their own testing and knew it was AK's. They were heavily censured by Chieffi for this. Nencini ensured the Rome Central testing centre performed this task, and it was found to be AK's. Or are you claiming, this too, is not permissible, even though the criminal law courts of Perugia and Florence accepted the testings were of legal standards?

BTW the Kercher DNA tested negative for blood because it was probably a sample of her skin or sinews that was embedded in the knife blade scratch, the wet blood having been rinsed off under the tap, and likely scrubbed with bleach by RS in their great washing up operation.

As for the handling of the knife, it was placed in a brand new calendar cardboard packaging. There is no way MK's DNA could have sneaked into it.

In any case, all of this was argued in court at the time, as per correct protocol, and Nencini upheld the Guilty verdicts. Florence being the highest court of the region.



.

.



.

.

 

[Vixen]

Interesting article by a Knox fan in Unherd. Title: The Creepiness of Amanda Knox.

And yet a strange thing happened: the longer she talked, the more it seemed possible that this small, cute, physically unimposing, nerdy-chic Seattle mom in platform boots could have done it. To be clear, I don’t believe she really did it. More important, there has never been any evidence that she did. But there is something about her affect and demeanour that gives off the eerie vibe that if any totally unlikely young woman could secretly be a crazed killer, it’s this one. The more she laughed and said how absurd it was, the more I could see why the police were suspicious.

<snip>

She mentioned some photographs in a particular situation made her look like “a flippant psycho”, cackling at the ridiculousness to a crowd of fans, but that was exactly what she looked like in that moment. She argued that such perceptions are the awful legacy of suspicion, media-distortion, and our dirty minds. Perhaps greater self-knowledge would come in realising that it is a mysterious quality of hers, unfortunate to be sure, that was visible to Italian investigators, and has been visible in photography since the early days of the case.

<snip>

And there are reasons for it. Knox doesn’t quite know how to treat other people. Her co-defendant Raffaele Sollecito, for example, has only a minor role in Free, mainly as a person whose life was, unlike hers, permanently derailed by the wrongful accusations. He’s still single, Knox writes. He’s a pariah in Italy, and he’s never been able to get steady work. Someone brought him up at the event, and she retold an anecdote from the book about how sad he was during their meeting in Italy in 2022, when a passer-by mistook her baby for his.

I thought Sollecito would have been unlikely to feel good about himself if he were sitting in the audience. Knox’s right to tell her story suddenly seemed more complicated than it had in the memoir. If you’ve come through an awful catastrophe, with multiple victims including yourself, and your ultimate success highlights your fellow survivor’s failure, do you really have every right in the world to promote it far and wide? There are some situations — many, actually — where we can’t say whatever we want, and this in order to protect the feelings of other people. Or we can, but we’ve chosen ourselves over them, and it’s going to look bad. https://unherd.com/2025/03/amanda-knox-creeps-us-out/

And this is one of her supporters.

Truth is, AK having fooled her supporters by drawing them into her 'victimised-by-Mignini' narrative and enabled by those with a grudge against Mignini with the means and access to mass media and film - tricked her way to freedom and is now trying to con those same kind, caring people - who bought into her bull-butter and pressured for her release from prison - into now buying her book braggingly called FREE* to put YOUR hard earned money into HER pocket. What a sting!




Credit: Kermit & Raper




*Laughing in your face.



.


.