Amanda Knox guilty - all because of a cartwheel

[Fulcanelli]

The essential problem with the test on the knife blade is that quantity of DNA detected is beneath the threshold of reliability. Stefanoni does not seem to have run any blank controls, so there is no way of knowing whether the test detected something from the sample or from trace contamination on the instruments. Such trace contamination is a factor even in well-run DNA labs, which is why the good ones include controls with each run of tests.

Who says?

''IF' the DNA got on the knife via contamination, how would a blind control rule that out?

 

[Fiona]

I still have not seen any evidence that controls were not done. Do we have any?

 

[Supernaut]

My understanding is that Waterbury is a an engineer, not a geneticist or forensic scientist. Why is his opinion any more special then anyone else's?

He is advised by people he knows (including personal friends) with specific backgounds in molecular biology and genetics, as you well know.

What are your credentials, again?

 

[Fulcanelli]

False.

That's what Raffaele says in black and white, read it for yourself:

He said: "It was a normal night. Meredith had gone out with one of her English friends and Amanda and I went to party with one of my friends.
"The next day, around lunchtime, Amanda went back to their apartment to have a shower."
As Amanda, from Washington DC, stepped into house she could tell there was something terribly wrong.
Raffaele said: "When she arrived the front door was wide open. She thought it was weird, but thought maybe someone was in the house and had left it ajar.

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/2007/11/04/italy-murder-details-emerge-98487-20058122/

 

[Fulcanelli]

He is advised by people he knows (including personal friends) with specific backgounds in molecular biology and genetics, as you well know.

What are your credentials, again?

'What' people? 'Secret' people? Who are they? Where are the actual quotes from them?

I don't need to give my credentials. I'm not holding myself up, neither is anyone else holding me up, as some sort of scientific expert in a field valid to the case (forensics, genetics etc).

 

[Supernaut]

I still have not seen any evidence that controls were not done. Do we have any?

Do you really need to have the impossibilty of 'proving a negative' explained to you? Or are you (yet again) simply demonstrating your disingenuousness?

The lab (that is, Stefanoni) can produce the records which show they adhered to the protocols in question, or there results should be ignored, period.

 

[Fiona]

Stefanoni testified the controls were done. Biondi said the protocols were adequate. That is the evidence. You claim the controls were not done: the onus is now on you to prove that claim. That is how it works.


By contrast, Stefanoni does not need to satisfy you or me or anyone except the court. Period

 

[Bruce Fischer]

A photo was posted upthread. The photo was originally emailed to me by Charlie. It is a still from a police video that Charlie has. Charlie has confirmed in this thread that he isn't aware of any other knives in the kitchen.

My original post with the photo of the knife draw is here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5808121&postcount=6547
Post 6547 seems such a long time ago now.

I have the photo on my knife page.

The other knife in the drawer could simply be a bread knife or it could be a slanted edge serrated knife or a fork tip serrated knife. The officer did not think to take the other knife in the drawer for testing. Neither one of the knives in the drawer looked like a murder weapon so why not test both?

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/TheKnife.html

 

[Fulcanelli]

I have the photo on my knife page.

The other knife in the drawer could simply be a bread knife or it could be a slanted edge serrated knife or a fork tip serrated knife. The officer did not think to take the other knife in the drawer for testing. Neither one of the knives in the drawer looked like a murder weapon so why not test both?

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/TheKnife.html

Why would he? Meredith had not been murdered with a serrated knife.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Fulcanelli says:

''IF' the DNA got on the knife via contamination, how would a blind control rule that out?

You've got to be kidding me.

 

[christianahannah]

I have the photo on my knife page.

The other knife in the drawer could simply be a bread knife or it could be a slanted edge serrated knife or a fork tip serrated knife. The officer did not think to take the other knife in the drawer for testing. Neither one of the knives in the drawer looked like a murder weapon so why not test both?

One reason could be that the knife left in the drawer did not have a pointed end but rather a rounded, blunt end so was not probable for it to be the murder weapon? I don't know that to be a fact, just my own conjecture. (Sorry, I had to edit your post because I still am not allowed to post images.)

 

[Fulcanelli]

Fulcanelli says:

''IF' the DNA got on the knife via contamination, how would a blind control rule that out?

You've got to be kidding me.

No, I'm not kidding you. Do you know what a blind control is? You try and match the finding to someone else's DNA, someone not connected with the case. If the sample matches them, then clearly the DNA on the blade is not relevant...it's a false reading. This can happen in a very noisy sample where noise can be mistaken for peaks. In this case, Stefanoni checked the DNA against Amanda, Raffaele and Meredith. It was a match for Meredith. But it's not an issue since it wasn't a noisy sample.

 

[Dan O.]

when they threatened to thrown me in jail for 30 years for lying to them...​

How does Amanda happen to know that the maximum jail term in Italy (apart from a life sentence perhaps) is 30 years? Is it just possible that they actually were threatening her in that interrogation?

 

[Fulcanelli]

Neither one of the knives in the drawer looked like a murder weapon so why not test both?

How does the kitchen knife 'not look like a murder weapon'? It looks like a very effective murder weapon to me. If someone stabbed you with that somewhere vital you'd be dead.

 

[Fulcanelli]

How does Amanda happen to know that the maximum jail term in Italy (apart from a life sentence perhaps) is 30 years? Is it just possible that they actually were threatening her in that interrogation?

Errm...her lawyers?

 

[shuttlt]

The essential problem with the test on the knife blade is that quantity of DNA detected is beneath the threshold of reliability. Stefanoni does not seem to have run any blank controls, so there is no way of knowing whether the test detected something from the sample or from trace contamination on the instruments. Such trace contamination is a factor even in well-run DNA labs, which is why the good ones include controls with each run of tests.

The only evidence we have that no controls were run is Dr Waterbury. His only evidence that controls weren't done is that he hasn't seen any evidence that they were. As we all know, he claims to have access to ALL the evidence the prosecution handed over to the defence. Those who know where he got this information aren't saying. Those who have access to this information aren't sharing. It would be nice to be able to see it so we could judge for ourselves. All sorts of things like the contents of the knife draw might be cleared up. It's clear already that the things Dr Waterbury finds interesting and relevant are different to the things that we find interesting and relevant, otherwise he would surely have published the picture of the knife draw. It's a pity for all of us that Dr Waterbury prefers to make it a question of us relying on his word, rather than giving us access to the data that proves it.

 

[shuttlt]

I still have not seen any evidence that controls were not done. Do we have any?

There is proof, but the people who have it aren't inclined to share.

 

[Dan O.]

Errm...her lawyers?

And when did they have a chance to tell her? Amanda speaks the truth when she writes "Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn't remember a fact correctly." In a hand written note the evening of Novmber 6, 2007.

 

[shuttlt]

Do you really need to have the impossibilty of 'proving a negative' explained to you? Or are you (yet again) simply demonstrating your disingenuousness?

Are we back to the question of why spoons from the draw weren't tested? I still haven't seen any evidence that this is standard forensic practice. Supposing that this is an important issue, I should imagine that, if the defence had wanted, they could have had the spoons tested. Don't you think though it would be very puzzling if it turned out that Raffaele's apartment was awash with Meredith's DNA? I mean, one LCN test of the knife and it comes back as a clean sample of Meredith!!! If this is just a fluke, what are the odds? How much of Raffaele, and Amanda, and the cleaning lady, and all sorts of other peoples DNA must there be all muddled together at Raffaele's in vastly greater quantity that Meredith's DNA?

My imagination really fails me to imagine a scenario where Meredith, never having been at Raffaele's, could be such a dominant DNA source on his cutlery. I mean, they got a clean hit for Meredith on the blade! If it's claimed that is just random chance, then WOW must the odds be low.

The lab (that is, Stefanoni) can produce the records which show they adhered to the protocols in question, or there results should be ignored, period.

Doubtless. In court. If they fail to do so, then it is the job of the defence to embarrass the hell out of them. Why should the lab produce the evidence for us? Dr Waterbury says he has proof that no controls were done. He is an Amanda Knox advocate, so presumably cares about proving this to the public. Let him share his proof. If he doesn't share the proof, then what are we to conclude but that he doesn't consider this an important enough issue to prove, or that releasing the data he has would be more damaging than proving this single point.

If Dr Waterbury is right, then surely he has proof that Dr Stefanoni lied on the stand about the controls? Is this mentioned in Amanda's 200+ page appeal document?

 

[shuttlt]

And when did they have a chance to tell her? Amanda speaks the truth when she writes "Not only was I told I would be arrested and put in jail for 30 years, but I was also hit in the head when I didn't remember a fact correctly." In a hand written note the evening of Novmber 6, 2007.

30 years is a pretty generic figure. If I was going to be specific about how long I was afraid of getting locked up for in a murder, I would go with 30 years and then probably 20 years. It could be that the police did mention the figure to her. If she and Rudy and Raffaele did kill Meredith, perhaps one of them mentioned the figure to her... they may well have known.