Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Malkmus]

And yet again, we've forgotten the bra clasp, footprints, witnesses, DNA....

Like I said...amnesia seems to be a theme.

The bra clasp the defense is claiming contamination against? Which we have video of LE passing around for it to pick up whatever is on the other's hands? Which was found weeks later in a location different from where it was the day after the murder? Which they claim is LCN DNA as well? Which was found at a time when there was no evidence against Rafaelle?

Footprints that tested negative for blood? So then were simply footprints from a person who lived there? And a bloody footprint attributed to Rafaelle even though he was the one who brought it to LE's attention and which somehow contains the second toe which none of his reference prints contain?

Witnesses who none of them can place Amanda and Raf at the scene of the crime?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

This is down to the actual evidence, not assertions. You may confuse assertions with evidence (on a daily basis), but rational people and most importantly, courts of law do not.

We've been over this many times already. What specific moles do you want to pop up again? There is no evidence of a staged break-in that we have not already dealt with, and no reasoning for a staged break-in from Massei that is not laughable.

It doesn't matter how she was using her machine...it would not just make up a profile that does not exist, least of all one that actually exists and just happens top be that of the murder victim in the crime she's investigating. Perhaps you could explain how that could accidentally occur?

It strains credulity that you have forgotten or never heard of the concept of contamination in the laboratory. Yet what alternative is there, except that you are playing dumb just to waste our time?

I wasn't aware "likely" was one of you requirements, especially in light of your posts over recent months. I was under the impression you considered "likely" as at best superfluous and at worst, something that just got in the way.

I have no idea what point you think you are making here. Possibly you could rephrase it?

 

[Malkmus]

You forget that the bathmat print is not compatible with Guede and compatible with Sollecito.
You forget the bra clasp.
You forget the lies hamperig the investigations.

I've addressed the first two in my reply to Fulc.

You forget the lies hamperig the investigations.

What lies hampered the investigation? And how do they place Amanda and Raf at the scene of the crime?

 

[Katody Matrass]

kitchen knife theory

I'm not certain, as I wasn't there...but I think Judge Massei's explanation is as good as any.

I think the explanation Fulcanelli agrees is as good as any is worth to be brought up in its' entirety. It's valuable as a comic relief and also as an illustration of farcical reasoning chains riddling Massei motivation:

Now, concerning how this knife could have found itself in the house at Via della Pergola when Meredith was killed, and in the custody of Amanda, the following must be observed: Amanda had with her a very large handbag, as Romanelli declared (page 51, hearing of 7 February 2009); in this handbag there could have been found a place for the knife in question. Amanda, in her various movements [about town], as for example to take herself to the le Chic pub situated in Via Alessi, could have found herself walking alone, even late into the night, on roads that could have seemed not very safe for a girl to be on at night time. It is thus possible and in fact probable, considering the relationship that Raffaele Sollecito had with knives (he never separated himself from his knife, as has been seen), that Amanda, advised and convinced by her boyfriend, that is Raffaele Sollecito, to take this knife with her, if not only to make her feel more secure, and that, if necessary, it could have served as a deterrent against possible ill-intentioned persons that, at night and on her own, she may have encountered. Furthermore, since it was a kitchen knife, Amanda, were she to be checked, would have been able to easily explain why she was carrying it.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

You forget that the bathmat print is not compatible with Guede and compatible with Sollecito.

Wrong. It's compatible with both but looks a lot more like Rudy's foot than Raffaele's.

You forget the bra clasp.

Wrong. The bra clasp was not collected properly and had DNA from multiple unknown persons on it, which is indicative of contamination from some source or another.

You forget the lies hamperig the investigations.

Circular reasoning: Unless you assume that they were guilty, there is no evidence they lied to hamper the investigation at any point. (Amanda's internalised false witness statement was not a lie, since she believed it to be true at the time and retracted it as soon as she got time to pull herself together and realised it was likely to be false).

 

[Katody Matrass]

And what were the other two doing while he was holding towels to her neck trying to stem the bleeding?

They were watching Naruto in a flat on Corso Garibaldi.

 

[Malkmus]

And what were the other two doing while he was holding towels to her neck trying to stem the bleeding?

If by "other two" you mean Amanda and Raf, I believe they were at Raf's apartment.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Dr. Hampikian's qualifications

Neither Hampikiens cited articles do.

All of the articles coauthored by Dr. Hampikian concern research into DNA of one form or another. There are two articles, one from 2009 and the other from 2010 that are more directly concerned with forensics. Note that the 2009 article is in the journal Science, one of the most prestigious science journals in the world.

Moreover, his home page lists other professional qualifications.

Let's see Dr. Stefanoni's so that we can compare.

 

[Machiavelli]

I get that, but how do you rule out the possibility that it's some other P. Stefanoni showing up in the final stage, the search of JBC? That's the bit I don't yet follow.

Because maybe you didn't go to jbc and see how there all authors are listed with their first name. You didn't check for information in italian pages for dr. Chiusano. And you didn't do a cross research in a forensic journal for "p. stefanoni".


http://www.fsijournal.org/search/quick

You also can do a search for fellows in the Federico II University of Naples and find some of Patrizia Stefanoni's co-authors.

In the end, yes it is merely an argument of authority, but it is not mine, it is halides' and some others' argument. For me I don't question her authority.

On the other hand this argument of authority could be misleading if you consider that recently (about last week) Patrizia Stefanoni, with her testimony managed to obtain the judge to order a new DNA expert study, in another case. She criticized and objected the work of prof. Vittorio Pascali (V.L Pascali), a professor at the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore of Milan, an authoer who has certainly an important list of articles in fsijournal.org.

 

[Katody Matrass]

And yet again, we've forgotten the bra clasp, footprints, witnesses, DNA....

Like I said...amnesia seems to be a theme.

I remember it was all disputed and discredited repeatedly. I remember also that it is usual for some defenders of that very weak pieces of evidence to quickly run out of arguments and resort to insults followed by an inevitable suspension

 

[Malkmus]

Yet the Italian authorities indicted two others who were then later found guilty. Why do you think that happened?

A grievous mistake.

 

[Withnail1969]

I think the explanation Fulcanelli agrees is as good as any is worth to be brought up in its' entirety. It's valuable as a comic relief and also as an illustration of farcical reasoning chains riddling Massei motivation:

Indeed. An utterly farcical supposition. If Amanda had actually been attacked, how was she supposed to deploy this large unwieldy knife from her handbag in time to actually defend herself? Why didn't she tell anyone else that she felt threatened?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

misunderstanding LCN DNA profiling

Elsewhere an anonymous commenter named The Machine wrote, “She [RoseMontague] claimed that Sollecito's DNA on Meredith's bra clasp was LCN DNA despite the fact that the lowest RFU peak was 30% higher than that the 50 RFU test widely used for minimum reliability and the highest RFU peak was more than 200% higher.”

The Machine does not understand the meaning of the phrase low copy number (LCN). Here is Dr. Mark Waterbury’s discussion:
“There are two common definitions of low copy number DNA profiling. The first states that profiling that falls below the normal stochastic limits can be considered LCN profiling. That is, when random noise becomes very loud because the sample size is very small, you have LCN, not standard DNA profiling. The second definition uses some quantity threshold criterion. If you have less than 200 picograms of DNA, for example, it is LCN. The critical factor is that the number of original template molecules in the sample, is very few, on the order of 5 – 10.”

Elsewhere Dr. Waterbury wrote, “Some profile peaks may be diminished, some may be increased, some may drop out entirely, and “stutters” may occur, poorly understood false peaks that are, in a sense, combinations of other peaks. The statistical variation resulting from the tiny number of starting templates is significant.

One occasionally finds disagreement about the numerical limit of LCN; my recollection is that some authors use 100 picograms and some use 500. One way to think about it is that the number of template molecules must be so low that the system does not behave deterministically. However, no one defines it in terms of RFUs. Such a definition would not make any sense: A sample could go from LCN to non-LCN just by increasing the number of PCR cycles. This would increase the size of the peaks but would not avoid the artifacts associated with LCN profiling. The Machine is not functioning correctly.

On the subject of artifacts and contamination in LCN profiling, I found the following quote:
“The increase in sensitivity of LCN analysis permits the detection of low levels of extraneous DNA contamination that, while often present, is not normally seen with standard 28 cycle STR analysis.17 Thus alleles may show up in the profile that do not originate from the principal DNA donor(s) (see Figure) and, in control experiments, have been shown to occur with known single donor samples. Such allelic drop-in is more-often-than-not of unknown origin but could be due to DNA from a variety of intra-laboratory sources including consumable items and personnel. As a result LCN analysis should only be conducted in sterile laboratory facilities that have in place suitable engineering controls, akin to those employed for mtDNA [mitochondrial DNA] analysis.”
17. Gill, P., J. Whitaker, C. Flaxman, N. Brown, and J. Buckleton. 2000. An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STRs derived from less than 100 pg of DNA. Forensic Sci Int 112 (1): 17–40.

I would like to draw everyone's attention to the higher likelihood of contamination in the LCN range and to the special precautions needed to minimize the chances of its happening.

 

[Machiavelli]

Circular reasoning: Unless you assume that they were guilty, there is no evidence they lied to hamper the investigation at any point. (Amanda's internalised false witness statement was not a lie, since she believed it to be true at the time and retracted it as soon as she got time to pull herself together and realised it was likely to be false).

You could object the bra clasp and the bathmat print each one indepentently on grounds which I don't subscribe with, but you should not lable mine as circular reasoning, because it is not: my assessment on the lies hampering the investigation is based, just like the other points, on independend grounds. I don't dismiss the chance that Amanda's confession could be internalized confession because I already think she is guilty, I dismiss this option instead only on the the basis of the analysis of Amanda's declaration itself. Just like DNA analysis and footprint measurements.
Moreover, my assessment is that there is evidence that the footprints in tha hallway are in blood and that there is evidence of a cleanup. There is also the relevant factor of the absence of an alternative lone-perpetrator scenario to explain the physical findings (especially related to the bloody bathmat print).
I also think there is evidence of a staged burglary in Filomena's room, particularly because of accumupation of phisical findings: the unopened drawers, the position of the stone and the broken bag on top of clothes scattered around, the absence of soil and grass inside, the reported absence of prints outside and of soil/grass marks on the wall, the presence of a total number of four stones, the presence of crumble of white paint from the shutter (not white plaster powder) on top of clothes, the testimony of Filomena about glasses on top of items, the presence of unknown shoeprints on paper sheets that were also found (identical shoe) in Meredith's room, the presence of two spots with luminol enhanced stains yielding a mixed profile Amanda/Meredith and zero DNA of Rudy in the room or in tha bathroom...

 

[Machiavelli]

All of the articles coauthored by Dr. Hampikian concern research into DNA of one form or another. There are two articles, one from 2009 and the other from 2010 that are more directly concerned with forensics. Note that the 2009 article is in the journal Science, one of the most prestigious science journals in the world.

In some way or another all the 4 listed publications of Patrizia Stefanoni deal with DNA research, and the latter two of them relate specifically to forensics.
I note the 2009 and 2010 articles, that Hampikiens would have not have if he was an expert in this trial, because he wrote them after the trial was concluded. I am also allowed to think he could have written on that particular subject rigt for the purpose of earning credits, in relation to the thesis-book he was already writing. Hardly I would consider his later assessments as objective or neutral work. Hampikian is clearly ideologically engaged, and his writings can be read with serenity only if they are introduced with the clause of this perspective.

 

[Malkmus]

You could object the bra clasp and the bathmat print each one indepentently on grounds which I don't subscribe with, but you should not lable mine as circular reasoning, because it is not: my assessment on the lies hampering the investigation is based, just like the other points, on independend grounds. I don't dismiss the chance that Amanda's confession could be internalized confession because I already think she is guilty, I dismiss this option instead only on the the basis of the analysis of Amanda's declaration itself. Just like DNA analysis and footprint measurements.
Moreover, my assessment is that there is evidence that the footprints in tha hallway are in blood and that there is evidence of a cleanup. There is also the relevant factor of the absence of an alternative lone-perpetrator scenario to explain the physical findings (especially related to the bloody bathmat print).
I also think there is evidence of a staged burglary in Filomena's room, particularly because of accumupation of phisical findings: the unopened drawers, the position of the stone and the broken bag on top of clothes scattered around, the absence of soil and grass inside, the reported absence of prints outside and of soil/grass marks on the wall, the presence of a total number of four stones, the presence of crumble of white paint from the shutter (not white plaster powder) on top of clothes, the testimony of Filomena about glasses on top of items, the presence of unknown shoeprints on paper sheets that were also found (identical shoe) in Meredith's room, the presence of two spots with luminol enhanced stains yielding a mixed profile Amanda/Meredith and zero DNA of Rudy in the room or in tha bathroom...

Machiavelli, I want to thank you (sincerely) for clarifying the literal meaning of Amanda's text message. "ci vediamo piu tardi" does equate to the English saying of "see you soon" with the intention of seeing that person the same day. However, since we know Amanda did not and could not have meant it to mean this and that LE did take it to mean she was going to meet someone that night, it reinforces my belief that the interrogation was led down a certain path by the police, not by Amanda as some would have us believe. I would like to know what you believe the scenario was that night, how Amanda went from stating she wasn't at the cottage that night to reversing that and saying she was there with Patrick.

By the way, funny about how we see the rock in the bag. I feel like it is the most obvious reason the break-in was not staged. Why would they leave the rock concealed in the bag when the most obvious thing to do with it would have been to place it closer to the opposite wall from the window to look like it had been launched across the room as they supposedly did with the glass? Why leave it hidden?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

More on Dr. Hampikian's publication list

Looks as if PubMed did not index some of these:

# Abu B. Kanu, Greg Hampikian, Simon D. Brandt, Herbert H. Hill Jr., Ribonucleotide and ribonucleoside determination by ambient pressure ion mobility spectrometry, Analytica Chimica Acta 658 (2010) 91–97.
# D. E. Krane, V. Bahn, D. Balding, B. Barlow, H. Cash, B. L. Desportes, P. D'Eustachio, K. Devlin, T. E. Doom, I. Dror, S. Ford, C. Funk, J. Gilder, G. Hampikian, K. Inman, A. Jamieson, P. E. Kent, R. Koppl, I. Kornfield, S. Krimsky, J. Mnookin, L. Mueller, E. Murphy, D. R. Paoletti, D. A. Petrov, M. Raymer, D. M. Risinger, A. Roth, N. Rudin, W. Shields, J. A. Siegel, M. Slatkin, Y. S. Song, T. Speed, C. Spiegelman, P. Sullivan, A. R. Swienton, T. Tarpey, W. C. Thompson, E. Ungvarsky, and S. Zabell, “Time for DNA Disclosure”, Science, Vol. 326. no. 5960, pp. 1631 – 1632, 18 December, (2009).
# Tim Andersen, Jeff Cope, Ken Cornell, Greg Hampikian, "Web Client and Server for Simultaneous and Multiple Protein Analysis," submitted.
# Lucian A. Lucia, Lambrini Adamapoulos, Jason Montegna, Greg Hampikian, Dimitris S. Argryopoulos, John Heitmann, A Simple Method to Tune the Gross Antibacterial Activity of Cellulosic Biomaterials, Carbohydrate Polymers 69 (2007) 805–810
# Greg Hampikian and Tim Andersen; Absent Sequences: Nullomers and Primes, Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 12:355-366 (2007).
# K. Moeller, J. Besecker, G. Hampikian, A. Moll, D. Plumlee, J. Youngsman and J.M. Hampikian, "A Prototype Continuous Flow Polymerase Chain Reaction LTCC Device," Materials Science Forum Vols. 539-543 (2007) pp. 523-528
# G. Hampikian, (2005), “The Future of Forensic DNA,” The Canadian Journal of Police and Security Services, (Spring, 2005).
# M. Crayton, C. Ladd , M. Sommer, G. Hampikian, L. Strausbaugh, An organizational model of transcription factor binding sites for a histone promoter in D. melanogaster, In Silico Biology 4, 0045 (October, 2004)
# “Exit to Freedom,” Johnson and Hampikian (University of Georgia Press, 2003): Calvin C. Johnson, Jr.’s autobiography (written by Hampikian). The true story of a man who served 16 years in Georgia prisons for a rape he did not commit until DNA evidence freed him. Afterward by Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project. Includes an appendix on DNA evidence by Hampikian.

* Awarded the 2004 Silver Medal in biography, (ForeWord Magazine's Book of the Year Awards).
* Nominated for the 2004 Robert F. Kennedy Book Award.
* Nominated for the 2004 African American Literary Awards.

# P. Henderson, D. Jones, G. Hampikian, Y. Kan, and G. Schuster, "Long-distance charge transport in duplex DNA: The polaron-like hopping mechanism," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, Vol. 96, Issue 15, 8353-8358, July 20, 1999
Click for Press release in layman's terms
# G. Hampikian, J. Graves, D. Cooper, 1994, "Sex-determination in the marsupial," in Molecular genetics of sex determination, (Ed. S. Wachtel), Academic Press From review in Science: "I found the rather personal chapter by Hampikian et al. on marsupials to be particularly useful in conjunction with the Drosophila chapter; together they provide a sense of the commonalities and differences that determine sexual dimorphism in each of these groups relative to each other and to the eutherian mouse-human group." --Science, 264:118, 1994
# M. Gaudette, G. Hampikian, V. Metelev, S. Agrawal and W. Crain, 1993, "Effect on embryos of phosphorothioate modified oligos. into pregnant mice," Antisense Res. & Dev.,3:391-397
# J. Graves, J. Foster, G. Hampikian, F. Brennan, 1993, "Sex-determination in marsupial mammals," in Sex chromosomes and sex determining genes, (Editors, K. Reed and J. Graves) Gordon and Breach, Melbourne
# J. Foster, F. Brennan, G. Hampikian, P.N. Goodfellow, A. Sinclair, R. Lovell-Badge, L. Selwood, M. Renfree, D. Cooper and J. Graves, 1992, "Evolution of sex determination and the Y chromosome: SRY-related sequences in marsupials," Nature 359:531-533
# F. Deak, Y. Kiss, K. Sparks, S. Argraves, G. Hampikian and P. Goetinck, 1986, "Amino acid sequence of chicken cartilage link protein from c-DNA clones," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83:3766-3770

 

[act1roson]

The difference is that we have a very large body of evidence about what sort of people commit crimes and why.

Young people with no history of violence whatsoever very, very rarely if ever meet a local crook they are not friends with at 21:05 and then decide at 21:10 to team up with them to gang-rape and murder their housemate. (Don't blame me, I didn't invent that scenario).

Whereas criminals with a history do sometimes escalate to greater crimes, such as habitual housebreakers who carry weapons escalating to rape and murder when they catch a woman alone who could identify them if they lived.



.

The convicted Mignini also has a history of imprisoning and brutally interrogating innocent people. He has also been suspicious of everyday objects as satanic. From "The Monster of Florence" a doorstop became “an esoteric object used to communicate between this world and the infernal regions.” He boldly stated that in court.

According to the search utility of this forum, Mignini's obsession with the doorstop has not been discussed. I would think anyone researching the prosecution of Amanda Knox would explore the lead persecutor.

Also, I would find it interesting to know how many of the posters here have read "The Monster of Florence" by Mario Spezi and Douglas Preston. It is non-fiction, and reading it would be most appropriate to understand what was going on in Perugia before Meredith Kercher and Amanda Knox arrived.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Identification of remains by DNA

Another couple of Stefanoni's publications:

"The Italian National Police DVI team "
A. La Rosa, A. Caglià, P. Asili, P. Stefanoni, A. Spinella, R. Biondo
Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series
August 2008 (Vol. 1, Issue 1, Pages 467-468)

"The use of the Y-chromosome not only for identification purpose but for investigation also"
P. Stefanoni, A. La Rosa, P. Asili, R. Biondo, A. Spinella, A. Caglià
Forensic Science International: Genetics Supplement Series
August 2008 (Vol. 1, Issue 1, Pages 448-450)

Machiavelli,

Here is the conclusion of the first article you cited above:

"The Italian Police DVI group is constituted of 12 subgroups.
Every sub-group is composed of: one pathologist, one
DNA expert, one forensic odontologist, two fingerprints, two
technical personnel (photographer and computer scientist), one
psychologist and two interpreters. This DVI staff is entirely
composed from technical–scientific personnel coming from the
Italian National Police and is able therefore to work as an
independent unit or in collaboration with other DVI units
(national or international)."

This paper is a description of the organization of a professional group to identify dead bodies in a disaster. Fiona indicated that Dr. Stefanoni took part in the identification of remains after the Tsunami of 2005, IIRC. While I applaud the effort, this paper does not advance DNA forensic science, as far as I can tell.

 

[Mary_H]

Rudy was known to have used a larger knife in his previous escapades. However that only explains it if the police had recognised Rudy's MO by that point, were protecting Rudy and were thus already looking for innocent people to frame for his crime.

I addressed this subject yesterday, when I wrote "Mark Waterbury thinks the police knew that Rudy was the killer, and that is why they went looking for a large kitchen knife instead of one of the knives from Raffaele's collection (which would make more sense). Remember, Rudy was caught with a large kitchen knife at one of his previous break-ins."

Dot # 4 Rudy was an informant, probably for the Perugian authorities. While he was protected as an informant, he committed burglaries and was caught with stolen property and a 10” kitchen knife. Every time he was caught, someone from PPB set him free. When he was merely spotted, someone gave the word and he was not investigated.
.................
Dot # 11 The Polizia grabbed a single item from Raffaele’s kitchen drawer, a big kitchen knife, for no apparent reason. They labeled it “the knife” and claimed that it was the murder weapon.

http://www.sciencespheres.com/