Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fulcanelli said:
I think you have the wrong day. Wasn't that activity what the defence claimed happened on the night of the 5th?
Click to expand...

You really do know nothing about this case unless it's written on PMF. You've surrounded yourself with believers of your own fantasy and completely lost track of reality. I provided the link. It says explicitly "58 minutes after midnight on November 2." Maybe you need to get out more.
 
shuttlt said:
I've been reading the New York Supereme Court ruling on LCN. Lab contamination, fraud and malpractice to one side, it does seem to offer some pretty clear views on the general admissability of LCN results.

While the defendant argues that the LCN DNA form of testing should be excluded under the Frye standard due to concerns such as transference, the increased incidence of allelic drop-out, drop-in, and stutter, as well as other alleged interpretation issues that the defendant claims may or may not arise when LCN DNA testing is performed, the Court finds that while these arguments are relevant as to the weight the trier of fact may wish to afford the proffered DNA evidence at trial, they do not affect the admissibility of the evidence for trial purposes pursuant to Frye.
Click to expand...
http://www.denverda.org/DNA_Documents/Megnath.pdf

For a court documents it's quite short and worth a read.
Click to expand...

The court in that document is referring to a specific procedure carried out in a lab specifically designed for it and for which there has been numerous validation tests to provide a scientific basis for accepting the results.

What the lab did in Rome only superficially resembles LCN DNA testing. They don't have the procedure, they don't have the facilities and they especially don't have the validation.
 
Moss said:
Ahem, argument by Hollywood movie? :jaw-dropp
There is some sick stuff around and there is an underground for violent (or violent looking) porn, but without further information if that is relevant to the case let's not dwell on that.
Click to expand...

:D

I was using it merely as an example that there is a world full of sick people.

The actual thrust of the argument is that just because someone doesn't want to admit to him/herself that these things happen does not mean they don't. Likewise, sticking one's fingers in one's ears and screaming "la la la I can't hear you" at the top of his/her lungs does not make an undesirable truth any less real.
 
Dan O. said:
The court in that document is referring to a specific procedure carried out in a lab specifically designed for it and for which there has been numerous validation tests to provide a scientific basis for accepting the results.

What the lab did in Rome only superficially resembles LCN DNA testing. They don't have the procedure, they don't have the facilities and they especially don't have the validation.
Click to expand...

So where was Amanda on the night of the murder?
 
Dan O. said:
The court in that document is referring to a specific procedure carried out in a lab specifically designed for it and for which there has been numerous validation tests to provide a scientific basis for accepting the results.

What the lab did in Rome only superficially resembles LCN DNA testing. They don't have the procedure, they don't have the facilities and they especially don't have the validation.
Click to expand...
I've heard so many contradictory things about the lab in Rome. Controls were done. Controls weren't done. This was the first and only time they'd used LCN. They'd used it a bunch of times before. That's a whole can of confused **** that I'd dearly love to put over to one side until people start producing documentation to support their claims. Perhaps some things will become clear when the translators have done their work. Perhaps they will become clear if the defence decide to make lab practice central to their appeal.

What the lab did in Rome only superficially resembles LCN DNA testing. They don't have the procedure, they don't have the facilities and they especially don't have the validation.
Click to expand...
This all may be, and if so it's pretty scandalous. I've seen many people say this stuff, I haven't seen anybody offer much in the way of proof. I've been looking and looking for transcripts no matter how incomplete of Stefanoni's cross examination and have come up practically empty handed. If this was the first and only time the lab have done and LCN test the defence presumably challenged her on that. The same goes for controls and all the rest. If FOA, the defence, or whoever has proof of all of this I really think their time and money could be better served by making this information public. Why not get Stefanoni's cross examination translated and published so we can see her admitting all this stuff? If she denies it, but there is proof that she has perjured herself, then terrific! a site should be set up dedicated to publicising this as it would make the FOA case credible to many people who currently find it incredible.
 
Last edited:
Dan O. said:
You really do know nothing about this case unless it's written on PMF. You've surrounded yourself with believers of your own fantasy and completely lost track of reality. I provided the link. It says explicitly "58 minutes after midnight on November 2." Maybe you need to get out more.
Click to expand...

I read every site and article that covers the case. Next ad hominem attack...
 
Dan O. said:
The court in that document is referring to a specific procedure carried out in a lab specifically designed for it and for which there has been numerous validation tests to provide a scientific basis for accepting the results.

What the lab did in Rome only superficially resembles LCN DNA testing. They don't have the procedure, they don't have the facilities and they especially don't have the validation.
Click to expand...

Please provide your evidence they didn't have the procedure or the facilities. The judges have validated it.
 
straight answer

Fulcanelli said:
Actually, the question was put to you guys first, specifically to Kestrel. What were they doing that night? I've yet to receive an answer since I asked the question.
Click to expand...

@Fulcanelli,

The first time I answered was on 20 February 2010. However, Bob's favorite question has been to ask about Amanda, not Raffaele.

@BobTheDonkey,

Where was Raffaele, and what are your reasons?
 
Dan O. said:
You really do know nothing about this case unless it's written on PMF. You've surrounded yourself with believers of your own fantasy and completely lost track of reality. I provided the link. It says explicitly "58 minutes after midnight on November 2." Maybe you need to get out more.
Click to expand...

Your cite is from Sollecito's computer expert whose claims directly contradict those of RS and AK themselves.
 
halides1 said:
@Fulcanelli,

The first time I answered was on 20 February 2010. However, Bob's favorite question has been to ask about Amanda, not Raffaele.

@BobTheDonkey,

Where was Raffaele, and what are your reasons?
Click to expand...

:D

I don't know - because we cannot trust Raffaele or Amanda's professed alibis because not only has Raf referred to them as rubbish, they also don't match.


But, then, I'm not the one professing his innocence (and thereby Amanda's). So, really, the burden of an alibi is on you at this point. We have plenty of reason to suspect that Raffaele was involved in Meredith's murder - so how about you present a solid alibi for these two for the night in question.


Edit:

I ask only about Amanda because, well, there has yet to be a sufficient, provable response. Everything presented has been contradicted by the pair and/or unsupported by what evidence we have. So, to keep us on target:

Where was Amanda on the night of the murder?


(We'll get to Raffaele once we've worked out a proper response to this one ;) )
 
Last edited:
halides1 said:
@Fulcanelli,

The first time I answered was on 20 February 2010. However, Bob's favorite question has been to ask about Amanda, not Raffaele.

@BobTheDonkey,

Where was Raffaele, and what are your reasons?
Click to expand...


But you didn't answer it in light of the facts I put in my post when I asked Kestrel the question. In other words, none of you have attempted to answer those points or the main question in light of those points. You've all just ducked it.
 
BobTheDonkey said:
I don't know - because we cannot trust Raffaele or Amanda's professed alibis because not only has Raf referred to them as rubbish, they also don't match.
Click to expand...

Worse, not so much as one single element of their alibis match.
 
stilicho said:
Your cite is from Sollecito's computer expert whose claims directly contradict those of RS and AK themselves.
Click to expand...

And does it even matter in any case, since it's well after the murder anyway and Raffaele's apartment is only 5 minutes away from the cottage? No.

The important period in terms of alibi, is between 9:30 and midnight. And for that, they have nothing, not a sausage, just a load of lies and stories that don't match those of the other and the only part of their alibi that does match has been proven to have actually in fact happened before 9 pm.
 
Just a FYI -

The translations of the Massei Report coming through at the moment are showing that Judge Massei has gone into excruciating detail in regard to foot measurements and features to demonstrate that the print on the bathmat was not Rudy's and was in fact Raffaele's, with diagrams and pictures included for reference.
 
This is good news. The more laborious the explanations of how facts were established the better. When the translators get their teeth into the LCN tests, don't keep it to yourself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom