Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Open Inquiry]

Ok, let me see if I'm getting this straight. Mark Waterbury, who is a materials engineer, has a blog about this case. He has not been retained by either the prosecution or the defense but has somehow gained access to "all of the information shared by the prosecution with the defense". The prosecution has even turned over to him, a total stranger, evidence they withheld from the defense. And he doesn't speak Italian.

And I missing anything?

He said he doesn't have what was withheld from the defense.

 

[Alt+F4]

He said he doesn't have what was withheld from the defense.

Then how does he know something was withheld from the defense?

Why would either the prosecution or the defense turn over information to an American blogger who has absolutely nothing to do with this case?

 

[Fulcanelli]

I have access to all of the information shared by the the prosecution with the defense, and in that sense I am a "primary source" rather than relying on news accounts, etc. Nowhere in that data are there any records of blank tests or any of the other control experiments mentioned in my blog articles. It is possible that they were performed, and not disclosed, as that has been a pattern with other material.

Dr. Stefanoni was compelled by the judges to release additional information about the DNA testing last summer, but the disclosure was still not complete. The withholding of evidence by the prosecution in this trial was sufficiently egregious that in a US court it would have resulted in dismissal.

Pap. Understand this...Italian law maintains that the defence be provided with certain data. All of that data was forwarded to the defence. The problem is, for the defence, is that they could not find any problem with that data. So, in court, they requested more data (data that is not normally supplied to defence teams and there is no legal binding to do so as it's not considered relevant). PM Comodi said 'fine', you can have it, but she was not obliged to give it. The judge gave formal notice this data would be provided and gave an adjournment for the defence, to review it. As expected, this data didn't help their cause, as it was not relevant which is why there was no obligation they be given it in the first place.

They had been given everything they had requested at that point. If Waterbury thinks, in disagreement with the judges, prosecution and defence teams something is missing then let him tell us 'what' it is that is missing. It's all good people like Waterbury screaming about what they don't have, but unless they tell us what they don't have...then it's hot air.

And really, Waterbury was the guy I had an argument with on another site who argued that it's not possible for luminol to detect blood because it detects it by iron and the iron is all locked within the walls of the blood cells and so can't be detected by luminol...I ask you. When I notified him that he'd better notify the various forensic labs around the world who had been using luminol to detect blood in error for all these years, he slinked off. Next time you speak, ask him if he's notified the world's best forensic scientists of this 'fact' yet and if not, why not

 

[Fulcanelli]

Good suggestions.

One thing, why do call him an "engineer". Isn't that reductionist?

Isn't that his Phd?

 

[Open Inquiry]

Then how does he know something was withheld from the defense?

Why would either the prosecution or the defense turn over information to an American blogger who have absolutely nothing to do with this case?

The defense might have known that certain parts were withheld. ?

Why do you think the defense would allow access?

 

[Alt+F4]

The defense might have known that certain parts were withheld. ?

Why do you think the defense would allow access?

You mean access to Mr. Waterbury? It's hard to believe that the experienced Italian defense team would turn over information to an American blogger with:
- no connection to the case
- who's not an expert
- who doesn't apparently speak Italian

in order to find evidence that was whithheld, which they couldn't find on their own.

 

[Open Inquiry]

Pap. Understand this...Italian law maintains that the defence be provided with certain data. All of that data was forwarded to the defence. The problem is, for the defence, is that they could not find any problem with that data. So, in court, they requested more data (data that is not normally supplied to defence teams and there is no legal binding to do so as it's not considered relevant). PM Comodi said 'fine', you can have it, but she was not obliged to give it. The judge gave formal notice this data would be provided and gave an adjournment for the defence, to review it. As expected, this data didn't help their cause, as it was not relevant which is why there was no obligation they be given it in the first place.

They had been given everything they had requested at that point. If Waterbury thinks, in disagreement with the judges, prosecution and defence teams something is missing then let him tell us 'what' it is that is missing. It's all good people like Waterbury screaming about what they don't have, but unless they tell us what they don't have...then it's hot air.

And really, Waterbury was the guy I had an argument with on another site who argued that it's not possible for luminol to detect blood because it detects it by iron and the iron is all locked within the walls of the blood cells and so can't be detected by luminol...I ask you. When I notified him that he'd better notify the various forensic labs around the world who had been using luminol to detect blood in error for all these years, he slinked off. Next time you speak, ask him if he's notified the world's best forensic scientists of this 'fact' yet and if not, why not

Luminol detects more than blood... It reacts with protein. Just saying...

"Luminol, however, only meets the first criteria, a high sensitivity to blood and to other protein-containing animal fluids, whether human or not. Another aspect of a luminol reaction is its different degrees of sensitivity from one substance to another. Luminol shows higher sensitivity to animal or human blood, organic tissues and fluids than to other compounds containing metal ions, such as paints, metallic surfaces, household products, or vegetable enzymes." - Luminol

World of Forensic Science | 2005 | COPYRIGHT 2005 Thomson Gale. This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group. (Hide copyright information) Copyright


(Kind of a random search find but it's a start.)

 

[shuttlt]

He's pretty vague about what exactly is lacking. Would you mind asking about specifics?

The only other comments I have are:

There is nothing secret about any of this. The relevant electrophoresis files were circulated by the forensic experts who put forth the petition. The fact that the defense has repeatedly requested information concerning protocols, controls, blanks, etc. from the prosecution has been openly discussed in court, and was part of the basis of the defense winning a motion requiring them to provide additional information last year.

It is impossible to prove that something does not exist, of course, without somehow having access to everything in existence. We can only go on what was presented in court. All of that, aside from photos of the body, etc. is available through the court in Perugia.

He says he doesn't have time to answer any more of my questions.

 

[shuttlt]

Ok, let me see if I'm getting this straight. Mark Waterbury, who is a materials engineer, has a blog about this case. He has not been retained by either the prosecution or the defense but has somehow gained access to "all of the information shared by the prosecution with the defense". The prosecution has even turned over to him, a total stranger, evidence they withheld from the defense. And he doesn't speak Italian.

And I missing anything?

His source is certainly not the prosecution. Also, he seems pretty clear he has access to the information that the defence have, he certainly doesn't claim to have more information than the defence have. As to whether he speaks Italian, I have no idea.

 

[Open Inquiry]

Isn't that his Phd?

When I hear 'engineer' it implies a host of options, such as computer engineer, mechanical engineer... with a variety of levels of knowledge. Such a train engineer is a machinist who may or may not have a lot of technical knowledge past a certain operational point. A computer engineer and a mechanical engineer don't have the greatest degree of crossover. If you look up materials science, you can see that it includes a forensics component. It is an interdisciplinary field.

From Wikipedia:

"It includes elements of applied physics and chemistry. With significant media attention focused on nanoscience and nanotechnology in recent years, materials science has been propelled to the forefront at many universities. It is also an important part of forensic engineering and failure analysis. Materials science also deals with fundamental properties and characteristics of materials." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materials_science


What is Materials Science [Geared for kids, but has a lot (valid) info] : http://www.strangematterexhibit.com/whatis.html

Biomaterials
Every part of your body is a material! Bone, muscles, fingernails, hair, and skin are all examples of different types of materials found in your body with remarkable properties that help you survive - from keeping you upright, and protecting you from heat or cold, to cutting and grinding your food. Some scientists try to mimic nature's designs to create materials for other uses, such as using the foam structure of bone as an inspiration for designing materials that are lightweight and strong.

 

[Open Inquiry]

You mean access to Mr. Waterbury? It's hard to believe that the experienced Italian defense team would turn over information to an American blogger with:
- no connection to the case
- who's not an expert
- who doesn't apparently speak Italian

in order to find evidence that was whithheld, which they couldn't find on their own.

Nobody said to find evidence that was withheld. I don't understand how you got that.

The defense isn't only in Italy.

 

[Alt+F4]

His source is certainly not the prosecution. Also, he seems pretty clear he has access to the information that the defence have, he certainly doesn't claim to have more information than the defence have. As to whether he speaks Italian, I have no idea.

He seems to be implying in his email to you that he was able to get the information he has from the court itself.

We can only go on what was presented in court. All of that, aside from photos of the body, etc. is available through the court in Perugia.

So anyone can just contact the court and get the entire trial transcript?

 

[Alt+F4]

Nobody said to find evidence that was withheld. I don't understand how you got that.

The defense isn't only in Italy.

Ok, then why would Amanda's American lawyers turn information over to a non-expert blogger with no connection to the case....for any reason?

 

[shuttlt]

So anyone can just contact the court and get the entire trial transcript?

At 2 euro a page. Anyway... goodnight all.

 

[Alt+F4]

So it seems Dr. Waterbury doesn't read Italian. From his blog:

Video by Andrew Lowery Anderson promoting the site, http://amandaknox.it with my articles posted in Italian.

So any information he would have obtained by the court in Perugia would be in a language he doesn't read. I haven't read on his blog one piece of information that isn't also available to anyone with an Internet connection. What is different about him and his blog from any of the other "Amanda is innocent" sites out there?

 

[Alt+F4]

At 2 euro a page. Anyway... goodnight all.

Interesting, so a 10,000 page trial transcript would cost about $13,000 (U.S.) to purchase. How much to get it translated into English? Is $1 a page about right? Another $10,000. Quite an expensive purchase.

EDIT: Bad math. At 2 Euros a page, it would cost $27,000 (U.S.) to purchase the entire trial if it did go as long as 10,000 pages (likely). Even if it was only 5,000 pages, we're back to the original $13,000 to obtain "all the information".

 

[Fulcanelli]

Luminol detects more than blood... It reacts with protein. Just saying...

"Luminol, however, only meets the first criteria, a high sensitivity to blood and to other protein-containing animal fluids, whether human or not. Another aspect of a luminol reaction is its different degrees of sensitivity from one substance to another. Luminol shows higher sensitivity to animal or human blood, organic tissues and fluids than to other compounds containing metal ions, such as paints, metallic surfaces, household products, or vegetable enzymes." - Luminol

World of Forensic Science | 2005 | COPYRIGHT 2005 Thomson Gale. This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group. (Hide copyright information) Copyright


(Kind of a random search find but it's a start.)

Don't misread. It doesn't react with 'protein', rather certain substances made up of certain proteins. For the record, proteins are common, you and I are full of them. But these don't set luminol off.

 

[Open Inquiry]

Don't misread. It doesn't react with 'protein', rather certain substances made up of certain proteins. For the record, proteins are common, you and I are full of them. But these don't set luminol off.

"a high sensitivity to blood and to other protein-containing animal fluids, whether human or not"

 

[Open Inquiry]

"a high sensitivity to blood and to other protein-containing animal fluids, whether human or not"

For example, the video of the bathroom showed a great deal of reaction - it was covered - but that was not revealing where Meredith's blood had been.

 

[Fulcanelli]

Interesting, so a 10,000 page trial transcript would cost about $13,000 (U.S.) to purchase. How much to get it translated into English? Is $1 a page about right? Another $10,000. Quite an expensive purchase.

EDIT: Bad math. At 2 Euros a page, it would cost $27,000 (U.S.) to purchase the entire trial if it did go as long as 10,000 pages (likely). Even if it was only 5,000 pages, we're back to the original $13,00 to obtain "all the information".

$1 a page for a professional translation??? No. Ask some of the professional translators on PMF what they'd charge a page (A4 size) to get an idea. Skeptical Bystander's a good person to ask. She's a professional translator and does so for a living.