Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Charlie Wilkes]

Not much, I have to agree with the court...it's not really relevant.

However, you've been rather naughty there...referring to it as a 'semen stain' like a fact. Nobody knows 'what' it is. It could 'possibly' be a semen stain (but I very much doubt it). It's more likely to be Meredith's Vaseline lip balm.

How's Chris?

OK, let's say "possible semen stain." Are you of the opinion that possible semen stains found at the scene of a sexual homicide are not really relevant in most or all cases, or just this one?

 

[HumanityBlues]

I am in Perugia picking up some fascinating information. I have confirmed that lawyers for Amanda and Raffaele requested DNA testing on the semen stain found on the pillow underneath Meredith's body. The court denied the request on the grounds that the test is not necessary because Meredith had an active sex life and so the stain is not relevant to the case. I'd be interested to hear what the group thinks about this decision.

It's ridiculous if true. Even if it's not semen, they can test it and find out. It may be irrelevant, but you have to test it to find out. What if it was Rudy Guede's semen? If you're running an objective you test for that. That reeks of incompetence.

 

[Fulcanelli]

OK, let's say "possible semen stain." Are you of the opinion that possible semen stains found at the scene of a sexual homicide are not really relevant in most or all cases, or just this one?

Not at the very last minute of a trial when you already have all your accused against which there is ample evidence and nobody, not even the defence is suggesting anybody else was involved.

What could your stain possibly show? What is it that you think it may add? If the stain 'is' semen and is shown to come from either Rudy or Raffaele it tells us nothing new, only what we already know...they sexually assaulted and then murdered Meredith and by belonging to one, it doesn't exculpate the other. If the semen belongs to Meredith's boyfriend, it tells us at some point there may have been sexual relations between him and Meredith. That we knew already. If it belongs to someone else entirely, then since it's impossible to date the stain, it's useless. If it is make-up or Vaseline lip balm then it's completely meaningless.

Do you have anything to add?

 

[HumanityBlues]

Not at the very last minute of a trial when you already have all your accused against which there is ample evidence and nobody, not even the defence is suggesting anybody else was involved.

What could your stain possibly show? What is it that you think it may add? If the stain 'is' semen and is shown to come from either Rudy or Raffaele it tells us nothing new, only what we already know...they sexually assaulted and then murdered Meredith and by belonging to one, it doesn't exculpate the other. If the semen belongs to Meredith's boyfriend, it tells us at some point there may have been sexual relations between him and Meredith. That we knew already. If it belongs to someone else entirely, then since it's impossible to date the stain, it's useless. If it is make-up or Vaseline lip balm then it's completely meaningless.

Do you have anything to add?

You're blowing smoke because you know it makes the investigators look really bad for not testing this. I'd like to hear the opinion of someone who isn't just a little court jester/patsy.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

It's ridiculous if true. Even if it's not semen, they can test it and find out. It may be irrelevant, but you have to test it to find out. What if it was Rudy Guede's semen? If you're running an objective you test for that. That reeks of incompetence.

They know there's a good chance it might be Guede's semen, and that finding would further undermine their case.

 

[Fulcanelli]

You're blowing smoke because you know it makes the investigators look really bad for not testing this. I'd like to hear the opinion of someone who isn't just a little court jester/patsy.

Why does it? For people like you, desperate to find fault with the ILE it is important, for that reason only. You've yet though to offer a reason of why it has any import in establishing the guilt or innocence of any of the three suspects.

And if you want to talk of incompetence, look no further then your own defence who waited until the last minute to present this 'evidence' in court when they knew fully well the court would reject it, instead of early in the trial. You might also, while you're about it, ask Wilkes why the defence didn't send off the stain for independent testing, since nothing was stopping them from doing so if they felt it was important. It's clear they employed this strategy because they didn't actually want it tested at all (what if it 'had' turned out to ne semen and was shown to be Raffaele's? Game over), rather they just wanted to sling some doubt about.

 

[Fulcanelli]

They know there's a good chance it might be Guede's semen, and that finding would further undermine their case.

How? Guede was already found guilty of sexually assaulting and murdering Meredith and Raffaele and Amanda were also convicted for doing so with him. If it was his semen, what would then change and why?

 

[RoseMontague]

This doesn't make sense unless they already know it doesn't contain DNA from Raffaele. They went to great efforts to find DNA that tied him to the murder scene, and they did not test a stain on a pillow found under her body? I don't think so.

 

[HumanityBlues]

Why does it? For people like you, desperate to find fault with the ILE it is important, for that reason only. You've yet though to offer a reason of why it has any import in establishing the guilt or innocence of any of the three suspects.
.

Desperate? They didn't even test for semen. Where's the desperation? The writing is on the wall. You don't even need to take two steps to find faults with the ILE. It reeks of incompetence. Reeks. Moreover, they should be happy to test it as according to the court jester, they have nothing to lose anyways.

The defense shouldn't have to even request it anyways. They should've tested in the first place if it was an objective and thorough investigation. I realize little court jesters are going to defend every misstep of the investigation, but that's fine. It's very obvious why they do it.

 

[Malkmus]

"Jason Gilder’s Specialties:
Forensic DNA profiling, population genetics, computerized automation, evolutionary computation, neural networks, expert systems, graphics, and pattern recognition techniques."
Wow. For a guy who earned his Ph.D just three years ago he sure has a lot of specialties in very diverse fields. Or did he become expert in all those fields during his former lives? One thing we can all conclude.........in his present life he doesn't suffer from low self-esteem.

///

Actually, I'd say so far you're the only one who's come to that conclusion, at least openly. But why don't you enlighten us. Former lives? If you have reason to believe Dr. Glider is being dishonest with his credentials then don't beat around the bush here. Just come out with it.

 

[Fulcanelli]

This doesn't make sense unless they already know it doesn't contain DNA from Raffaele. They went to great efforts to find DNA that tied him to the murder scene, and they did not test a stain on a pillow found under her body? I don't think so.

Either the prosecution already knew it wasn't relevant (via DNA testing), or they didn't pass a black light over the pillow (it wasn't a visible stain).

 

[RoseMontague]

They know there's a good chance it might be Guede's semen, and that finding would further undermine their case.

What is the worst case scenario for the prosecution? Maybe DNA from an unidentified male that is not Raffaele or Rudy (or the boyfriend)? That would fit with the scenario that Rudy had an accomplice (that was not Raffaele or Amanda).

 

[Fulcanelli]

Desperate? They didn't even test for semen. Where's the desperation? The writing is on the wall. You don't even need to take two steps to find faults with the ILE. It reeks of incompetence. Reeks. Moreover, they should be happy to test it as according to the court jester, they have nothing to lose anyways.

The defense shouldn't have to even request it anyways. They should've tested in the first place if it was an objective and thorough investigation. I realize little court jesters are going to defend every misstep of the investigation, but that's fine. It's very obvious why they do it.

Oh, save the hyperbole and mock self righteous outrage.

Just tell us exactly why it's so important already.

Who is 'they'? It wasn't down to the them. It was down to the judge, that's who the request was made to, not the prosecution/police. And the judge was well within his rights...the defence deliberately left it until the last minute to request the judge order the testing of something they could have tested any time themselves. It was a defence TACTIC, which the judge refused to swallow. You may be quite happy to swallow it, being a cheerleader for the band...but don't expect us to.

If you really think it's important, then stop whining and write off to the defence and request they test it, like they had ample opportunity to do months ago.

 

[Fulcanelli]

What is the worst case scenario for the prosecution? Maybe DNA from an unidentified male that is not Raffaele or Rudy (or the boyfriend)? That would fit with the scenario that Rudy had an accomplice (that was not Raffaele or Amanda).

But would be useless as evidence since the stain cannot be dated.

 

[HumanityBlues]

Oh, save the hyperbole and mock self righteous outrage.

Just tell us exactly why it's so important already.

Who is 'they'? It wasn't down to the them. It was down to the judge, that's who the request was made to, not the prosecution/police. And the judge was well within his rights...the defence deliberately left it until the last minute to request the judge order the testing of something they could have tested any time themselves. It was a defence TACTIC, which the judge refused to swallow. You may be quite happy to swallow it, being a cheerleader for the band...but don't expect us to.

If you really think it's important, then stop whining and write off to the defence and request they test it, like they had ample opportunity to do months ago.

Patsy please. I realize the jester will make an excuse for anything, but it never should have come to the judge. The investigators should have tested it without having to have their hand held. I'll even grant you that the defense should have requested it earlier (whether I believe it or not), that certainly doesn't help your trail of excuses to defend the incompetence of not even testing it in the first place. It's just patsyism at its finest, nothing more.

 

[HumanityBlues]

But would be useless as evidence since the stain cannot be dated.

The implications of what was just said are laughable. Just think, under this presupposition, this kind conversation would be acceptable:

Investigator 1: "Look over there, this could be a semen stain".

Investigator 2: "Very interesting. Should we test it?".

Investigator 1: "Nah what's the point? It's just a possible semen stain at a murder scene".

Investigator 2: "Great point. Let's go fry some hard drives."

 

[Fulcanelli]

Patsy please. I realize the jester will make an excuse for anything, but it never should have come to the judge. The investigators should have tested it without having to have their hand held. I'll even grant you that the defense should have requested it earlier (whether I believe it or not), that certainly doesn't help your trail of excuses to defend the incompetence of not even testing it in the first place. It's just patsyism at its finest, nothing more.

The investigators didn't know about it, it was the defence expert that found it.

Now tell us, why didn't the defence test it?

 

[Fulcanelli]

The implications of what was just said are laughable. Just think, under this presupposition, this kind conversation would be acceptable:

Investigator 1: "Look over there, this could be a semen stain".

Investigator 2: "Very interesting. Should we test it?".

Investigator 1: "Nah what's the point? It's just a possible semen stain at a murder scene".

Very good questions...you can ask the defence all of these questions when you write off to them to ask them why they didn't test the stain.

 

[HumanityBlues]

The investigators didn't know about it, it was the defence expert that found it.

Now tell us, why didn't the defence test it?

How on earth did the investigators miss it? Are you trying to make them look bad? It's not the defense's job to build a case against themselves jester! Whether they found it, tested it or not, doesn't excuse the incompetence of the investigators who should have been doing their jobs without having their hands held in the first place.

 

[Malkmus]

The investigators didn't know about it