Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[LondonJohn]

I don't think there is any reason to believe that Steve Moore isn't a retired FBI agent. What I'm curious about is this:



How did he get all that (especially the autopsy report) and who paid for the translation (which would be about 100,000 Euros for the transcripts alone, never mind the translation).

Link:
http://www.nwcn.com/news/washington...BI-Agent-says-Knox-is-innocent-101839513.html

I don't think Steve Moore is lying - it's a pretty specific set of details to have lied about. I have a hunch that Moore might have got this information through official law enforcement channels, rather than as a private citizen. I believe that the FBI, CIA, State Department and NSA have plenty of people who would be able to translate Italian to English quickly and accurately......

 

[Katody Matrass]

katy_did
I don't have a Mac at hand to test it now, but I have the Spotlight documentation in front of me right now, and it looks like it memorizes opening date for any doubleclicked file in a metadata attribute independent from the file system.
[Can't post url for now]
Looks like you were right, not me. Sorry for the mess-up.
It would also suggest that the cops indeed watched Stardust on Nov 6 and Massei is covering them

 

[Alt+F4]

Speaking of Steve Moore, catch this comment in regard to Meredith's bedroom, from a radio interview he did:

I mean you can't avoid stepping on blood because once Rudy had stepped in blood he tracked it all over the room. So you couldn't play hop scotch and get past blood on your shoes. You would leave bloody footprints.

A few pages back I was being told that when Rudy left the bedroom to clean up in the bathroom there was no blood on the bottom of his shoes. Steve Moore says that is impossible.

(29:33)
http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/2010/05/former-fbi-investigator-steve-moore.html

 

[Alt+F4]

Did he say he paid to have them translated or had them translated?

According to the report, "he says he obtained the Italian trial transcripts, police and autopsy reports and had them translated into English." The shot in story then shows the reporter flipping though maybe a hundred pages when we know all the paperwork is probably close to 50,000 pages.

The guy worked with terrorism investigators and retired from the FBI. I'm purely guessing he went through the state department to get the transcripts.

Why would the State Department have the transcripts? Is there evidence they do? And if they did have it, why the heck would they turn it over to someone who has absolutely nothing to do with the case whatsoever? What does being a terrorism investigator have to do with a rape/murder investigation?

The guy has some serious stroke in the FBI. I'm sure it wouldn't have been to hard for him to get a translator in the FBI or CIA to translate the documents for him.

What evidence do you have that he has any more pull than any other retired agent? Do you how much time it would take to have a professional translation done of everything. Months I would think.

All those branches would have had to do is hand it off to one of their new employees.

It would be highly unethical to ask a government employee to spend months on a translation that was not regarding government business.

Regardless of how he got it translated, I'm still waiting to see someone rebuke his arguments with evidence.

See my above post regarding bloody footprints and the bathmat.

 

[Alt+F4]

I don't think Steve Moore is lying - it's a pretty specific set of details to have lied about. I have a hunch that Moore might have got this information through official law enforcement channels, rather than as a private citizen. I believe that the FBI, CIA, State Department and NSA have plenty of people who would be able to translate Italian to English quickly and accurately......

Everything Steve Moore has said is based on information already pubically available. As for the translation, I commented above.

Let me add, if he is using government resources for a "pet project" he could be in serious trouble.

 

[katy_did]

katy_did
I don't have a Mac at hand to test it now, but I have the Spotlight documentation in front of me right now, and it looks like it memorizes opening date for any doubleclicked file in a metadata attribute independent from the file system.
[Can't post url for now]
Looks like you were right, not me. Sorry for the mess-up.
It would also suggest that the cops indeed watched Stardust on Nov 6 and Massei is covering them

Thanks Katody, again I'll take your word for it since my knowledge on these things is pretty limited (especially when it comes to Macs!).

It does seem like the defence must be able to distinguish between last opening and last accessed times, since otherwise the argument over Naruto would be a non-starter (the prosecution could just say the file was accessed through a p2p program and that it hadn't actually been opened). It's astonishing that Massei skims over something that's potentially so important and refuses to criticize the police. If the file had been opened at 23.00, say, there probably wouldn't have been a case at all...

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Massei on the clasp and Tagliabracci's testimony

Massei’s argument about the number of disputed versus undisputed loci (found in the translated sentencing report roughly on page 297) is completely off point. Massei must believe that Dr. Tagliabracci is wrong about all six disputed loci, or else the principles of DNA profiling indicate that Raffaele is excluded. However, Massei does not provide a clear reason for rejecting Dr. Tagliabracci’s assessment in favor of Dr. Stefanoni’s. Raffaele’s appeal (approximately page 144) correctly notes that Massei’s argument about the numbers of disputed and undisputed loci is contrary to the principles of forensic genetics. This is another instance in which the Massei report fails in its purpose of explaining the reasons for the decision.

 

[katy_did]

Massei’s argument about the number of disputed versus undisputed loci (found in the translated sentencing report roughly on page 297) is completely off point. Massei must believe that Dr. Tagliabracci is wrong about all six disputed loci, or else the principles of DNA profiling indicate that Raffaele is excluded. However, Massei does not provide a clear reason for rejecting Dr. Tagliabracci’s assessment in favor of Dr. Stefanoni’s. Raffaele’s appeal (approximately page 144) correctly notes that Massei’s argument about the numbers of disputed and undisputed loci is contrary to the principles of forensic genetics. This is another instance in which the Massei report fails in its purpose of explaining the reasons for the decision.

Fully agree, Chris. Massei says "even if you [the defence] are right, there are more matching loci than non-matching, so your argument is invalid". And even though Massei's argument is complete nonsense, it means he avoids having to give a reason for rejecting Tagliabracci's statements. As you say, it's another example of Massei choosing arbitrarily to adhere to a particular theory without providing any reason for doing so.

 

[LondonJohn]

Everything Steve Moore has said is based on information already pubically available. As for the translation, I commented above.

Let me add, if he is using government resources for a "pet project" he could be in serious trouble.

What if he were using government resources for a government project though......?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

katy_did
I don't have a Mac at hand to test it now, but I have the Spotlight documentation in front of me right now, and it looks like it memorizes opening date for any doubleclicked file in a metadata attribute independent from the file system.
[Can't post url for now]
Looks like you were right, not me. Sorry for the mess-up.
It would also suggest that the cops indeed watched Stardust on Nov 6 and Massei is covering them

Aha! Nice work clearing that up folks.

P2P software definitely doesn't open a file when it shares it. So Massei's handwave to explain the opening of Stardust isn't just implausible, it's knowably wrong.

He should have known that the only way that file could have been opened while the computer was in police custody was for the police to have opened it, thus out of malice or stupidity the police destroyed a vital piece of evidence that could potentially have destroyed their case.

We might need to compile a list of vital pieces of evidence that the police falsified, destroyed, concealed or just failed to properly document.

The falsified list would include all the media leaks that turned out to be lies like the bleach story, Curatolo's evidence (since we now have strong reason to believe that they were at home opening Naruto when Curatolo claims he saw them), the claim that Guede's bloody shoeprint matched Raffaele's shoe, and the claim that the bloody footprint on the bathmat matched Raffaele's foot. Additions welcomed.

The destroyed/concealed list would be the hard drives, the metadata for Stardust, the computer files and logs from the DNA lab, the recording of Amanda's interrogation where she claims she was browbeaten, struck and encouraged to fantasise about being in the murder house, and the negative results for blood from the luminol footprints. Additions welcomed.

The not-properly-documented list would be the alleged evidence of a staged break-in and the failure to image the hard drives. Additions welcomed.

To me it's striking how much of the guilters' "go to" evidence is on the list of things we should reasonably doubt. All the best evidence for Amanda and Raffaele's guilt (the "staged break-in", the DNA results, the confession) is improperly documented or partially concealed. For me it's cause for serious concern if the only time the police can find good evidence it's when they have the opportunity to conceal what they are up to. It's a bit like someone who claims they can levitate, but only when nobody is looking.

Similarly it's worrying when the evidence that we know the police destroyed is exactly the evidence we've now established could well have cleared Amanda and Raffaele. When they can only get good evidence when nobody is looking, and they "accidentally" destroy the evidence that could have spoiled their case, it adds up to a disturbing picture.

 

[Chris C]

According to the report, "he says he obtained the Italian trial transcripts, police and autopsy reports and had them translated into English." The shot in story then shows the reporter flipping though maybe a hundred pages when we know all the paperwork is probably close to 50,000 pages.

I think its obvious he has them or are you denying that he has them? If you think he has them, then through the State Department ( http://www.state.gov/ ) would be my first GUESS as how he got them. If you are denying he has them then thats a whole different discussion.
Why would they turn them over to a retired FBI agent is a simple answer. Freedom of Information Act. That pretty much covers any document the government has thats not classified.

Why would the State Department have the transcripts? Is there evidence they do? And if they did have it, why the heck would they turn it over to someone who has absolutely nothing to do with the case whatsoever? What does being a terrorism investigator have to do with a rape/murder investigation?

Part of the State Departments job is Foreign affairs. This includes American citizens being accused and/or convicted of crimes outside the US. Especially a high profile case like Knox's. I seriously doubt that everyone in the department reads and writes in Italian so yes they would request and translate it. I seriously doubt that Italy would turn down a request for a trial transcript to their Ally.
What does being a terrosim investigator have to do with rape murder? Im answering your question on how he POSSIBLELY obtained the documents. Not answering what he has to do with rape/murder. Terrorism investigators, even retired ones from the FBI still maintain a security clearance.

What evidence do you have that he has any more pull than any other retired agent? Do you how much time it would take to have a professional translation done of everything. Months I would think

He is retired. They all got pull.

It would be highly unethical to ask a government employee to spend months on a translation that was not regarding government business.

Ethics? What does ethics have to do with it. If Hilary asks for a translated copy of the trial because she wants to review it. Then Hilary gets it. Thats part of her departments job. If Hilary decides to release it via the Freedom of Information Act then nothing is unethical. I'm not saying she has it. You ASKED how he obtained it and I gave you a POSSIBLE solution.

See my above post regarding bloody footprints and the bathmat.

So are you agree with Moore or disagreeing?

 

[RoseMontague]

I think there is a difference between avoiding stepping in blood when you are in a violent struggle with someone vs when you can actually watch where you are stepping.

I am trying to catch up and I am wondering how this rumor about Steve Moore not being the retired FBI Steve Moore or if he is an impostor came about. Surely they would not claim this without some solid evidence to back this up.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Medievalphobia

Malkmus,

Skeptical Bystander at PM wrote, "Perugia is not, as you claimed, a 'medieval' town, though that term probably conveys to the average viewer the idea of barbarity you may have wanted to suggest in choosing it."

To those of us who have even casually studied medieval times, the word does not convey barbarity at all. Skeptical Bystander is medievalphobic.

 

[Malkmus]

Malkmus,

Skeptical Bystander at PM wrote, "Perugia is not, as you claimed, a 'medieval' town, though that term probably conveys to the average viewer the idea of barbarity you may have wanted to suggest in choosing it."

To those of us who have even casually studied medieval times, the word does not convey barbarity at all. Skeptical Bystander is medievalphobic.

I'm sure "barbaric" is exactly what all the travel sites I listed were going for in trying to lure tourists to Perugia. I know when I'm planning my next vacation I'll be looking for someplace tranquil, off the beaten path, and barbaric.

 

[Malkmus]

Speaking of Steve Moore, catch this comment in regard to Meredith's bedroom, from a radio interview he did:



A few pages back I was being told that when Rudy left the bedroom to clean up in the bathroom there was no blood on the bottom of his shoes. Steve Moore says that is impossible.

(29:33)
http://knoxarchives.blogspot.com/2010/05/former-fbi-investigator-steve-moore.html

Alt, I listened to the interview. It's clear that Steve Moore is pointing out the fact that Rudy's bloody shoeprints were found all over the bedroom and hallway, yet none were found of Amanda or Raf and that is highly unlikely if they were involved in the murder. No one knows exactly what Rudy's movements were during and after the murder. But we do know that he stepped in blood and tracked it everywhere at some point and that AK and RS would have also. It's also possible that Rudy realized he stepped in blood in the bedroom, removed his shoes, and walked to the bathroom to rinse off. The notion that AK and RS did leave shoeprints then cleaned them up, leaving only Rudy's has been discussed as highly improbable for several reasons. But I'd like to add to that list of reasons that it would have been almost impossible for Raf to distinguish between his and Rudy's shoeprints as they were nearly identical in pattern.

EATF: Also, it's highly likely that if Amanda and Raf had staged a clean-up after Rudy had already left that Raf would have mistaken Rudy's shoeprints for his own and cleaned those up too. Better safe than sorry, right?

 

[Alt+F4]

So are you agree with Moore or disagreeing?

I'm agreeing with him. If you believe that he has all the information regarding the crime (however he got it) then he has seen all the crime scene photos and knows that no one could have left Meredith's bedroom without blood on the bottom of their shoes.

In addition, if Rudy went to the small bathroom with the specific purpose of cleaning up then why would he go back to the bloody room?

 

[Alt+F4]

What if he were using government resources for a government project though......?

He is retired. He is no longer an employee of the federal government. Do you have evidence otherwise?

 

[Mary_H]

Everything Steve Moore has said is based on information already pubically available. As for the translation, I commented above.

Let me add, if he is using government resources for a "pet project" he could be in serious trouble.

Reporters embellish or simplify at times. Actually, reporters embellish or simplify all the time. It is likely Steve Moore told Linda Byron he had looked at the translated reports, and Linda jumped to the conclusion he had had them translated himself. It's not that big an issue, since, as you point out, the records are publicly available and anyone can check them against what Steve said, if they feel the need to verify.

"Serious trouble?" You sound like Peter Quennell. Trust me, none of these empty threats elicit anything but amusement from their targets.

 

[Mary_H]

I think there is a difference between avoiding stepping in blood when you are in a violent struggle with someone vs when you can actually watch where you are stepping.

I am trying to catch up and I am wondering how this rumor about Steve Moore not being the retired FBI Steve Moore or if he is an impostor came about. Surely they would not claim this without some solid evidence to back this up.

Peter Quennell made it up, like he does everything else. It's on tjmk.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Reporters embellish or simplify at times. Actually, reporters embellish or simplify all the time. It is likely Steve Moore told Linda Byron he had looked at the translated reports, and Linda jumped to the conclusion he had had them translated himself.

This seems to me the most likely explanation. It's also entirely possible that Steve Moore had some bits translated that he thought were important, but did not have absolutely everything translated, and that the reporter misunderstood this.