Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RoseMontague]

These paragraphs are from a New Zealand Herald article on low copy number (LCN) DNA.
“The bogey is contamination. The very sensitivity of the technique which enables it to extract a DNA profile from the tiniest sample also makes it extremely vulnerable to contamination. Stringent measures are needed to minimise that risk.
The ESR has spent $1 million building special anti-contamination areas at its premises in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch. Protocols are being developed for crime scenes where the LCN technique is used and for the handling of samples from collection through to courtroom.
LCN crime scenes will be divided into cold, warm and hot zones hot being the crime zone. Clothes are put on and discarded at each zone to minimise the risk of contamination.
We live in a ‘soup’ of DNA, explains ESR forensic programme manager Keith Bedford. ‘If I were to shed dandruff, massive amounts of dna could fall ... hair could carry DNA. The way I am speaking at the moment, we could probably detect DNA on this pad in front of me.’”

That is an excellent article, Chris. My favorite quote:

"LCN is not just about turning up the dial in the DNA lab, or about a tweak to the DNA system," says Bedford, "it is a reworking of the the whole process."

If you read the entire article and see what is required in terms of effort and money to set up a lab and a process for LCN DNA testing, the more you realize that Stefanoni did not invent a new process for LCN DNA testing. Instead she broke every rule, standard, and protocol possible in her "testing".

Amanda's appeal attributes a quote from her about such protocols where she indicates that such things are just recommendations, not requirements. I think she sees the only requirement is finding something that points the finger of guilt at the accused. In her mind, the end has justified the means.

After doing some research on this topic I went back and returned to Dr. Waterbury's post from March 8th of this year. It is an excellent summary of what standards Stefanoni ignored or broke in this case. Her result was presented as science and accepted as true by the judges and jury under the magic heading of DNA evidence. Instead it should have been considered as Junk Science.

http://www.sciencespheres.com/2010/03/lcn-dna-part-ii-watch-where-you-sneeze.html

 

[Supernaut]

"The Knife" in a nutshell

These paragraphs are from a New Zealand Herald article on low copy number (LCN) DNA.
“The bogey is contamination. The very sensitivity of the technique which enables it to extract a DNA profile from the tiniest sample also makes it extremely vulnerable to contamination. Stringent measures are needed to minimise that risk.
The ESR has spent $1 million building special anti-contamination areas at its premises in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch. Protocols are being developed for crime scenes where the LCN technique is used and for the handling of samples from collection through to courtroom.
LCN crime scenes will be divided into cold, warm and hot zones hot being the crime zone. Clothes are put on and discarded at each zone to minimise the risk of contamination.
We live in a ‘soup’ of DNA, explains ESR forensic programme manager Keith Bedford. ‘If I were to shed dandruff, massive amounts of dna could fall ... hair could carry DNA. The way I am speaking at the moment, we could probably detect DNA on this pad in front of me.’”

Was the kitchen knife from RS’s apartment deemed to be “suspicious” because it had stains or material on it?

No, quite the reverse - it looked “suspiciously clean” (just who do they think they are fooling?).

So, it was subjected (naturally) to ‘‘low copy number” DNA amplification testing.

Except – they weren’t actually LCN tests in any accepted sense, but the extraordinarily facile (if not asinine) process of repeatedly cranking up the amplification in an otherwise conventional procedure.

In a lab which has never bothered to get certification from ANY accredited international body researching the science of forensic DNA analysis (and the equipment is American).

A lab which, unlike almost every other such facility in the world, has NEVER ONCE REPORTED an incidence of sample contamination.

Stefanoni made at least half a dozen passes which produced peaks the equipment told her were “too low” for interpretation, before she got a faint set which MIGHT be PART of MK’s profile.

Voila – we have a murder weapon. ONE of them, since it’s known this one absolutely could not have inflicted two of the three wounds.

(I was thinking - maybe there were THREE knifes! You know, RG, RS and AK all had one each. Yeh - of course! How come Mignini never thought of this?)

 

[junebug]

A word about the ERASMUS programme:

ERASMUS is not some exclusive exchange programme for the high-flying leaders-of-tomorrow - as some people seem to believe. It is a politically-motivated scheme designed to promote and further the idea of European Union. Around 200,000 students across Europe participate in it each year: hardly a small or exclusive group.

The number of students engaged in the ERASMUS programme mean it is not a small group by any measure, but in the interests of understanding the significance of the number you quote it is helpful to put this into context:

in 2007/08 there were c183,000 students participating in the ERASMUS program, drawn from 31 countries. There are c1.8 million full-time undergraduates at UK universities.​

You say the group is not exclusive. It is true that requirements vary from institution to institution but Leeds, where Meredith was studying, requires applicants for ERASMUS to have achieved a minimum 2:1 average from their first year. That certainly demonstrates some exclusivity.

Furthermore, Leeds Uni is not a prestigious UK institution

This statement beggars belief. Leeds is a member of the Russell Group. I suggest you research its RAE ratings.

...and "European Studies" is not a prestigious academic discipline.

Perhaps you should so inform the leading European universities that make up Europeaum. It appears they have been misled in this by Oxford.

I am only making these points to put Meredith's academic credentials into the correct context, and to correct those who think that getting accepted onto ERASMUS somehow denoted a special brilliance. It does not.

I don't believe that acceptance by the ERASMUS programme denotes "brilliance", but your post has signally failed to supply the correct context of Meredith's academic credentials.

 

[MissWorld]

On pages 392-394 of the Judges Report, the rather odd theory is presented that Amanda and Raffaele participated in the murder due to the evil effects of smoking hashish and reading sexually explicit comic books.

Is there anyone here willing to defend this theory?

No

 

[LondonJohn]

The number of students engaged in the ERASMUS programme mean it is not a small group by any measure, but in the interests of understanding the significance of the number you quote it is helpful to put this into context:

in 2007/08 there were c183,000 students participating in the ERASMUS program, drawn from 31 countries. There are c1.8 million full-time undergraduates at UK universities.​

You say the group is not exclusive. It is true that requirements vary from institution to institution but Leeds, where Meredith was studying, requires applicants for ERASMUS to have achieved a minimum 2:1 average from their first year. That certainly demonstrates some exclusivity.



This statement beggars belief. Leeds is a member of the Russell Group. I suggest you research its RAE ratings.



Perhaps you should so inform the leading European universities that make up Europeaum. It appears they have been misled in this by Oxford.



I don't believe that acceptance by the ERASMUS programme denotes "brilliance", but your post has signally failed to supply the correct context of Meredith's academic credentials.

Interesting first post. Welcome to JREF.................

A few points:

Firstly, your comparison between pan-Europe ERASMUS student numbers and total UK student numbers is interesting, but misleading. For a start, your "1.8 million" figure is for total full-time undergraduates. Given that most university courses are three-year (minimum) to six year (maximum) courses, this actually equates to around 500,000 students in each year group. This is the correct comparator when looking at the 200,000 annual ERASMUS numbers. And in addition to that, there are certain courses that are essentially tailor-made for ERASMUS participation ("European Studies" and Modern European languages spring immediately to mind), whereas other subjects such as Ancient Greek or Law lend themselves less readily to exchange capabilities.

Secondly, The Russell Group, as you might know, is a partnership formed to promote and market the research capabilities of universities in the UK. This means research in the proper academic sense - i.e. in the fields of science, engineering, mathematics, medicine and social science. Not European Studies.
Leeds Uni does indeed have a well respected department of medicine, and a reasonably well-known science lab. But it has no first-class reputation in politics or humanities. So no, I don't think my statement beggars belief at all. Leeds is usually regarded as a "3rd division"* university in the UK - which places it ahead of a great deal of higher education establishments. but not near the top.

And thirdly, The Europaeum (to which you referred above) is a collective of top universities across Europe, whose aim is to create a virtual pan-European "university without walls". But the academic disciplines covered within this remit are the traditional areas of arts, sciences, social sciences, medicine and humanities. Nowhere is "European Studies" mentioned as an academic discipline. The University of Oxford (the UK's sole member of the Europaeum) does not offer "European Studies" as an academic course. So I'm not sure at all what your point is in this regard.

http://www.europaeum.org/europaeum/?q=category/1/1/2


* The current Times Higher Education Supplement Top 200 World Universities Ranking places Leeds Uni at number 99, behind the following seventeen other UK universities: Cambridge (2); Univ Coll London (4); Imperial Coll London (5=); Oxford (5=); Edinburgh (20=); King's Coll London (23); Manchester (26); Bristol (34); Warwick (58); Birmingham (66); LSE (67=); York (70=); Glasgow (79); Sheffield (82); St Andrews (87=); Nottingham (91); Southampton (95=).

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/Rankings2009-Top200.html

 

[Kevinfay]

First time post here, however, I've followed the case for over two years.

Just wondering what people think of the motivations report, and what likelyhood there is of any of the three convicted being found not guilty of the actual murder, on appeal (I can't see any of them proving that they were not present at the cottage?). I can see no chance for RS and RG but 6 reasons why AK may be found not to have actually been in the murder room. Against that, I see 2 reasons it is possible she was. I'm not sure whether I could say beyond reasonable doubt that she stabbed Meredith.

The report has AK, RS and RG arriving at the cottage after Meredith. Then:

- AK and RS get each other sexually aroused ... probably making quite a noise about it.

- Guede gets excited, and wants 'his' ... report says 'he needed no encouragement from AK and RS' .. Meredith doesn't want to know, so he sexually assaults her.

- An excited RS is next into the room, he helps subdue Meredith

- Finally, AK comes into the room and deals the fatal blow.

Reasons to suppose AK didn't enter the room:

- No physical evidence of her in the room, there is of both RG and RS

- Guede, who certainly was in the room, only accused RS, saying specifically, AK 'no c'entra un cazzo' ... sod all to do with it ... although he says she was in the house.

- AK's blurted out confession has her in the kitchen with her fingers in her ears ... could be true?

- AK took the stand, the other two didn't. Why was she so much more confident of being found not guilty than them?.

- The jury accepted that there was no bad feeeling between AK and Meredith previously. Someone can commit murder without a reason, but RG had a sexual motive, RS seems a strange guy with his interest in animal sex, Manga magazines and knives. Those two seem far more likely to get carried away?.

- AK's general demeaner could suggest someone who is guilty of letting someone die rather than being an actual killer?. For example, at the end of the trial, when she knew a guilty verdict was likely, she pleaded not to be forced to 'wear the mask of a killer' ... if she wrote the 'Marie Pace' story, then that seems to written by someone guilty of letting someone die?.

Reasons to suppose that AK entered the room and stabbed Meredith:

- Double DNA knife - but it is far from certain it was used in the murder and even then, was it used by AK?. Did she merely wash it ...

- Scratch on AK's neck .... unlikely to be a love bite ... could Guede have held a knife at her throat and warned her to keep quiet ... possible?

Anyway, I think the report gives the best explaination I have seen for what happened and why, but I'm still not convinced AK was in the murder room. If I was on the jury, I would have to ask one of the judges whether my doubts count as reasonable doubt?

I think we are very close to the truth, but we'll probably have to wait for a confession from one of the convicted until we know for sure?

 

[junebug]

Welcome to JREF.................

Thank you.

Firstly, your comparison between pan-Europe ERASMUS student numbers and total UK student numbers is interesting, but misleading. For a start, your "1.8 million" figure is for total full-time undergraduates.

Which is precisely what I said.

This means research in the proper academic sense - i.e. in the fields of science, engineering, mathematics, medicine and social science. Not European Studies.

While you are of course entitled to your opinion as to what constitute proper academic fields, your statement presents your opinion as fact and offers no evidence in support.

Leeds Uni does indeed have a well respected department of medicine, and a reasonably well-known science lab. But it has no first-class reputation in politics or humanities.

The 'Excellent' ratings in humanities subjects in the 2008 RAE do not support your assertion with regard to humanities.

Leeds is usually regarded as a "3rd division"* university in the UK

By whom? How is this regard evidenced? And what do you mean by "Third Division"? In the absence of further information I assume that this implies there is a First and a Second Division above it, and possibly a Fourth Division beneath it. I don't understand how you think your citation supports your Third Division claim; it instead disproves it rather conclusively.

And thirdly, The Europaeum (to which you referred above) is a collective of top universities across Europe, whose aim is to create a virtual pan-European "university without walls". But the academic disciplines covered within this remit are the traditional areas of arts, sciences, social sciences, medicine and humanities.

From your statement I suspect there is a fundamental disagreement between us on whether or not interdisciplinary areas of study are "proper academic" areas.

Nowhere is "European Studies" mentioned as an academic discipline.

A Fellowship in Iberian and European Studies at Oxford has recently been advertised under the aegis of Europeaum. Europeaum identifies in its mission statement its aim to serve as a resource for the general support and promotion of European studies. It has created a database of academics working in European Studies.

The University of Oxford (the UK's sole member of the Europaeum) does not offer "European Studies" as an academic course. So I'm not sure at all what your point is in this regard.

I'm sorry that my original post was unclear in this regard. My point was that Oxford was a founder member of Europeaum.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

award given

Italian police given award for their work in the Meredith Kercher murder.

 

[el buscador]

Italian police given award for their work in the Meredith Kercher murder.

Hmm, if these 43 are the best in Italy one does have to wonder what the worst are like, or even their average.

 

[LondonJohn]

Thank you.



Which is precisely what I said.



While you are of course entitled to your opinion as to what constitute proper academic fields, your statement presents your opinion as fact and offers no evidence in support.



The 'Excellent' ratings in humanities subjects in the 2008 RAE do not support your assertion with regard to humanities.



By whom? How is this regard evidenced? And what do you mean by "Third Division"? In the absence of further information I assume that this implies there is a First and a Second Division above it, and possibly a Fourth Division beneath it. I don't understand how you think your citation supports your Third Division claim; it instead disproves it rather conclusively.



From your statement I suspect there is a fundamental disagreement between us on whether or not interdisciplinary areas of study are "proper academic" areas.



A Fellowship in Iberian and European Studies at Oxford has recently been advertised under the aegis of Europeaum. Europeaum identifies in its mission statement its aim to serve as a resource for the general support and promotion of European studies. It has created a database of academics working in European Studies.



I'm sorry that my original post was unclear in this regard. My point was that Oxford was a founder member of Europeaum.

I think that you're failing to make a distinction between "European studies" (i.e. studies within Europe) and "European Studies" (i.e. the title of an academic course dedicated to studying European affairs).

But in any case, the original point that I was trying to make was that Meredith Kercher was most likely a slightly-above-average higher-education student at a mid-ranking UK university, studying a course where an exchange year abroad was an integral part of the programme and not a special prize.

I have no interest in delving into Meredith Kercher's life and aspirations (for many reasons, not least ones of respect), but I also find it hard to understand why some people following this case feel it necessary to exaggerate her talents and potential. She was, by all accounts, a very well-liked young woman who died in a horrible and tragically life-shortening way, and her family and friends deserve every sympathy.

 

[Malkmus]

Italian police given award for their work in the Meredith Kercher murder.

Was Raffaele's uncle, Giuseppe, one of the 43 people honored? He was, after all, the one that corrected the police's false match of the the bloody shoe print to Raffaele by ingeniously counting the number of spirals on the bottom of it.

 

[LondonJohn]

And in other exciting news: the police have given awards to other members of the police for their work on a case where the the police have been widely criticised. A spokesman for the union representing the police says that the awards to the police are fair and justified.

This action clearly now completely extinguishes all speculation that the police were actually incompetent and/or misguided in their investigation of the case in question. Doesn't it?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

The Police

And in other exciting news: the police have given awards to other members of the police for their work on a case where the the police have been widely criticised. A spokesman for the union representing the police says that the awards to the police are fair and justified.

This action clearly now completely extinguishes all speculation that the police were actually incompetent and/or misguided in their investigation of the case in question. Doesn't it?

LondonJohn,

From a report prepared by the human rights group EveryOne (Report on Police Violence in Italy), “When human rights activists report episodes of violence or abuse of power being perpetrated by rogue officers to local or national institutions, a worrying phenomenon nearly always takes place. Instead of collecting precise reports of the episodes in order to investigate and identify those responsible for the abuse, the superiors shut up like a clam, denying without question that such disgraceful acts could have taken place. They assume a threatening tone with the associations and threaten to report them for slander, libel and defamation etc. This attitude, which the leaders of EveryOne themselves have witnessed on several occasions, prevents the rogue officers being isolated and their behaviour discouraged. On the contrary, it makes them feel part of an agency in which they are allowed to act above the law using violence, threats and acts of gratuitous coercion. According to the activists, after reporting misconduct by uniformed police officers towards racial minorities, it is not rare for the activists themselves to be followed by plain clothes policemen or summoned to police stations or headquarters and ‘advised’ not to take any further action.”

Here are the words of an anonymous commenter about the police receiving an award: “Good for them! I wish we knew each of them by name. The most common tactic of the Amanda-groupies is to call ‘them’ sloppy or incompetent or brutal or whatever without actually having to say their names. It's a cowardly way to attack people. Very good news.” I would like to know their names, too. I have a few questions for them.

 

[LondonJohn]

LondonJohn,

From a report prepared by the human rights group EveryOne (Report on Police Violence in Italy), “When human rights activists report episodes of violence or abuse of power being perpetrated by rogue officers to local or national institutions, a worrying phenomenon nearly always takes place. Instead of collecting precise reports of the episodes in order to investigate and identify those responsible for the abuse, the superiors shut up like a clam, denying without question that such disgraceful acts could have taken place. They assume a threatening tone with the associations and threaten to report them for slander, libel and defamation etc. This attitude, which the leaders of EveryOne themselves have witnessed on several occasions, prevents the rogue officers being isolated and their behaviour discouraged. On the contrary, it makes them feel part of an agency in which they are allowed to act above the law using violence, threats and acts of gratuitous coercion. According to the activists, after reporting misconduct by uniformed police officers towards racial minorities, it is not rare for the activists themselves to be followed by plain clothes policemen or summoned to police stations or headquarters and ‘advised’ not to take any further action.”

Here are the words of an anonymous commenter about the police receiving an award: “Good for them! I wish we knew each of them by name. The most common tactic of the Amanda-groupies is to call ‘them’ sloppy or incompetent or brutal or whatever without actually having to say their names. It's a cowardly way to attack people. Very good news.” I would like to know their names, too. I have a few questions for them.

Yeah, I saw those words too, and I have to say I agree that a) we are all "Amanda-groupies" and b) we are all cowards. And it's a good job we don't know the names of Patrizia Stefanoni, Edgardo Giobbi, Giuliano Migini, Giancarlo Massei, or Claudia Matteini. After all, we wouldn't want to criticise their actions, reasonings or motives by name now, would we.....?

The stuff from EveryOne Group is very interesting, too. While EveryOne might be suspected of having a particular agenda, I think they are pretty well respected internationally as campaigners for human rights and against abuses of power.

Here's an interesting campaign by EveryOne regarding the allegedly injudicious and harrassing use of "calunnia" charges. Sound familiar?

http://www.everyonegroup.com/EveryO...f_EveryOne_Groups_human_rights_defenders.html

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Italian police given award for their work in the Meredith Kercher murder.

Well, isn't that something - I wonder if this will have any bearing on any and all the upcomming court preceedings. Hopefully this will put a muzzel on all the FOA talk about bad police work. Really, how often are awards like this given out. Outstanding - keep up the good work boys, you make us all proud,

 

[Kevinfay]

I think that you're failing to make a distinction between "European studies" (i.e. studies within Europe) and "European Studies" (i.e. the title of an academic course dedicated to studying European affairs).

But in any case, the original point that I was trying to make was that Meredith Kercher was most likely a slightly-above-average higher-education student at a mid-ranking UK university, studying a course where an exchange year abroad was an integral part of the programme and not a special prize.

I have no interest in delving into Meredith Kercher's life and aspirations (for many reasons, not least ones of respect), but I also find it hard to understand why some people following this case feel it necessary to exaggerate her talents and potential. She was, by all accounts, a very well-liked young woman who died in a horrible and tragically life-shortening way, and her family and friends deserve every sympathy.

I'd agree 100% with that. However, when I've suggested that there was no jealousy between AK and Meredith, due to intelligence, popularity or looks, I was constantly shouted down, as 'disrepecting Meredith'. It doesn't make the murder any less tragic and the jurors saw it the same way, according to the Motivations Report.

The same people were determined to make Guede a saint, simply because he is not Amanda Knox. When I said that he would have been one to trigger the murder, I was called a racist. Again, the jury saw it the same way I did, according to the Motivations Report.

I don't know how these people can take a balanced view of the case?. However, the report shows how crazy a lot of their long held notions have been?.

 

[Antony]

First time post here, however, I've followed the case for over two years.

... <snip> ...

The report has AK, RS and RG arriving at the cottage after Meredith. Then:

- AK and RS get each other sexually aroused ... probably making quite a noise about it.

- Guede gets excited, and wants 'his' ... report says 'he needed no encouragement from AK and RS' .. Meredith doesn't want to know, so he sexually assaults her.

- An excited RS is next into the room, he helps subdue Meredith

- Finally, AK comes into the room and deals the fatal blow.

... <snip> ...

Anyway, I think the report gives the best explaination I have seen for what happened and why, but I'm still not convinced AK was in the murder room. If I was on the jury, I would have to ask one of the judges whether my doubts count as reasonable doubt?

I think we are very close to the truth, but we'll probably have to wait for a confession from one of the convicted until we know for sure?

Kevin, this shows what Amanda and Raffaele are up against, when the trial judge produces a work of fiction like this. There is absolutely no evidence to support this sequence of events.

The evidence is that Meredith was murdered around 9pm on 1st November (a time when Raffaele was active on his computer); that a knife was used that has not been retrieved; and that Guede was in the room and had sexual contact with her, having entered the flat by a broken window. He had also been arrested a number of times before the murder for breaking and entering, and carrying a weapon - and was then released by the Perugia police.

Amanda and Raffaele left no trace that they had ever been in this room - Raffaele's DNA on a bra clasp contaminated with the DNA of 4 other unknown people is not sufficient to show that he was in the room. There is also no evidence to connect the kitchen knife from Raffaele's flat to the murder - the positive reading for Meredith's DNA was obtained in an improperly conducted test.

It is also clear that the Perugia police conducted an improper "investigation": all of the alleged statements by Amanda implicating herself, came from an oppressive series of interviews in which her rights were not safeguarded; they handled evidence improperly; and they negligently ignored potential evidence that might not have suited their conclusion of Amanda's and Raffaele's guilt.

Their accusations against Amanda and Raffaele of conducting a clean-up and staging the break-in are again not supported by evidence, and indeed cannot be fitted into the timescale of the crime and its discovery. Not only that, but in the weeks previous to the case (between 12-14 October), there was the unexplained death of a non-violent alleged drugs offender in the custody of the same Perugia police force (google "Aldo Bianzino").

This is a rogue police force; and it is when you recognise that the case against Raffaele and Amanda rests entirely on their assertions, the case is put in context. Those clinging to the belief that Amanda and Raffaele were involved in the murder (including the trial judge) are doing so because of a completely uncritical acceptance of the police story.

 

[Antony]

Well, isn't that something - I wonder if this will have any bearing on any and all the upcomming court preceedings. Hopefully this will put a muzzel on all the FOA talk about bad police work. Really, how often are awards like this given out. Outstanding - keep up the good work boys, you make us all proud,

The Italian police giving an award to itself doesn't change any of the facts which are in the public domain: the abuse of the rights of suspects, the mishandling of evidence and the negligence towards evidence that didn't suit their agenda. It remains to be seen whether the the "defamation" trials and the appeal will be objective and impartial, or like the original trial, will act as a rubber stamp for a verdict decided by the police.

 

[katy_did]

Mt reading of Raffaelles's appeal relates an incident where his family was robbed and one of the investigators was quoted in the "waste books" as saying ("I'm glad, too little") pg 125/126 of Raffaele's appeal.

Seems like an appropriate time to quote that particular section of the appeal...

4.4 THE COMMENTS OF THE AGENTS IN THE DAYBOOKS/WASTE BOOKS

There is a particular (distasteful) aspect on which the judgment of the 1st degree has avoided dwelling: whilst some relatives of Sollecito spoke amongst themselves, in some passages of the daybooks the explicit observations of the agents were incautiously noted: “two idiots” they laugh; “********ting as usual”; “he who laughs last laughs longest”; “two snakes”, etc (See transcripts from the hearing on 30.11.2009, p. 21-22).

This is an element with respect to which the defence called the attention of the Court during the address by counsel (see transcripts of the hearing on 30.11.2009, pp. 21-23), albeit with the appropriate clarifications and warnings (Bongiorno: “I am not amongst those who think there were conspiracies in the investigations, that is not in my mentality”, p. 21 transcript cit.).

The defence held, however, to emphasize how those same daybooks documented, if not prejudice, then at least a notable circumspection bordering on intolerance on the part of some operators towards Raffaele’s family.

The annotations appear eloquent enough.

There are also those who wished the worst trouble on one of Raffaele’s relatives who had suffered an attempted burglary during the night (“I am glad, too little”).

These passages of the daybooks are so serious as to require no further condemnation.

The risk that the process may be marked with errors and/or unintentional oversights is part of the phenomenology of any trial, but we wanted to reiterate this episode (of a particular seriousness), because – in the opinion of the defence – it heightened the need for a particular caution in the evaluation of the evidence on the part of the Court.

 

[Dan O.]

First time post here, however, I've followed the case for over two years.

Welcome to the JREF Kevin.


Most of your post has been covered repeatedly in these threads. But you make one comment that hasn't been discussed much:

- Scratch on AK's neck .... unlikely to be a love bite

Have you actually seen this "scratch"? Thanks to Charlie for providing many excellent photographs from the case, we don't have to imagine what this mark would look like. This is what Amanda's hickey looked like at the time of her arrest 5 days later...

​

Are you going to maintain that this is a knife wound?