Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[moodstream]

He manufactured evidence in my opinion, but he did it in plain sight under the glare of scrutiny and no one really seemed to care overmuch....

Is there any other 'first world' country where the courts would allow that, or that the press wouldn't throw a fit?

Knox and Sollecito were arrested without any evidence whatsoever. Then, the police were forced to announce that a 'fourth man', completely unrelated to K/S or Lumumba, would be sought. Only then, after that, did the knife evidence appear. Pretty hinky, huh?

 

[Kaosium]

Knox and Sollecito were arrested without any evidence whatsoever. Then, the police were forced to announce that a 'fourth man', completely unrelated to K/S or Lumumba, would be sought. Only then, after that, did the knife evidence appear. Pretty hinky, huh?

What is it with the press over there? Do they have any protections from these 'slander' suits? Is it they won't criticize even egregious oversteps by a prosecutor because they're fed tidbits of juicy sleaze when a suspect is captured?

 

[Chris C]

The problem I had squaring the whole story of the bra clasp and the knife with reality is wondering to myself if he's going to go to that extreme to get actual physical evidence of Amanda and Raffaele (kinda) at the murder site, why not just actually plant some? Go back and just drop some hairs on a carpet near where the body was found and order one last 'check?'

He manufactured evidence in my opinion, but he did it in plain sight under the glare of scrutiny and no one really seemed to care overmuch....

Is there any other 'first world' country where the courts would allow that, or that the press wouldn't throw a fit?

I'm not sure any of the DNA is manufactured. However, that being said, They have still yet to prove its even Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp. How many neutral observers have even looked at the DNA logs? The US is having problems now with biased dna testing. Cases are getting tossed out and overturned because of it. The defense has a valid argument on the bra clasp. Plus apparently Perugia's testing lab has NEVER had any contamination. Problem is the Prosecutions side is trying to say they did everything perfect and exactly like it should have been done when collecting evidence and there is no way of any contamination. That in itself is untrue and makes me personally wonder exactly how professional these people are.

 

[Chris C]

What is it with the press over there? Do they have any protections from these 'slander' suits? Is it they won't criticize even egregious oversteps by a prosecutor because they're fed tidbits of juicy sleaze when a suspect is captured?

Well Mignini has a past of targeting journalist that cross him and arresting them.

 

[Kaosium]

I'm not sure any of the DNA is manufactured.
However, that being said, They have still yet to prove its even Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp. How many neutral observers have even looked at the DNA logs? The US is having problems now with biased dna testing. Cases are getting tossed out and overturned because of it. The defense has a valid argument on the bra clasp. Plus apparently Perugia's testing lab has NEVER had any contamination. Problem is the Prosecutions side is trying to say they did everything perfect and exactly like it should have been done when collecting evidence and there is no way of any contamination. That in itself is untrue and makes me personally wonder exactly how professional these people are.

I didn't mean that the DNA was necessarily manufactured, but as you note the evidence it was found on was obtained under such conditions that it becomes hard to fathom it is 'evidence' of murder. Plus the fact that's all that was found makes it doubly strange, being as there's plenty of Rudy's DNA about which you'd expect from a person fighting for their life.

That's what I meant by 'manufactured.'

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

The problem I had squaring the whole story of the bra clasp and the knife with reality is wondering to myself if he's going to go to that extreme to get actual physical evidence of Amanda and Raffaele (kinda) at the murder site, why not just actually plant some? Go back and just drop some hairs on a carpet near where the body was found and order one last 'check?'

He manufactured evidence in my opinion, but he did it in plain sight under the glare of scrutiny and no one really seemed to care overmuch....

Is there any other 'first world' country where the courts would allow that, or that the press wouldn't throw a fit?

It happens in the US. Fred Zain always came up with just what the prosecutor needed, every time. But he was a total fraud.

People get railroaded all over the world. Usually it's not as obvious as this case, and usually it doesn't get anywhere near as much publicity.

 

[Kaosium]

First time poster, hi everyone.
First , it's Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni.Please check your spelling.
Second, she hasn't "invented " any procedure. She just changed the sequencer machine settings. Someone may see it as bad lab practice, others may think it is a novel approach to forensic DNA sequencing. Scientific breaks are often the result of non-standard procedures employed by scientists following a hunch feeling.

Hello to you too, Bambi.

If anyone involved in the prosecution was interested in claiming credit for a scientific breakthrough, why wouldn't they be interested in producing the electronic data files so that other scientists could recreate and analyze the electropherograms? There's someone who often posts here who is very interested in that data judging from his recent posts.

I think the investigation is somehow flawed, and Amanda and Raffale could be innocent, but you people are showing a remarkable degree of ignorance of the case, and a high level of xenophoby that surely isn't helping their case

What kind of influence could posters on an English language website have over an Italian court? In this specific case I have read that at least two people who reside outside Italy have been accused of 'slander' which I have read carries a jail term in Italy. What does that actually mean? Will they be tried in absentia and sentenced like that Albanian in Britain was not long ago when he was convicted of a murder in Italy when he was residing in England?

 

[Kaosium]

It happens in the US. Fred Zain always came up with just what the prosecutor needed, every time. But he was a total fraud.

People get railroaded all over the world. Usually it's not as obvious as this case, and usually it doesn't get anywhere near as much publicity.

Oh, I understand that all right. It was the exposure in this instance I find puzzling. I have no illusions that evidence has never been manufactured in the US, it's just doing it before TV cameras and announcing it and no one apparently caring much that I'm having difficulty comprehending.

 

[RoseMontague]

Oh sorry about misspelling xenophobia, but I don't think it's relevant though, while I would expect someone like you, who's so competent about the case, would at least be able to spell the names of the relevant players correctly And about your choice of not getting into the DNA discussion, I understand you have good reasons to do so.

I was the one that misspelled Stefanoni, not Mary_PH. So sorry. Here is a list of the things that make that test invalid: (From Science Spheres)

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


1. The DNA wasn't amplified enough; the very weak fluorescence was simply blown up.
2. The test site was not remote from other DNA tests to avoid contamination.
3. Specialized LCN-quality entry procedures to avoid contamination were not used.
4. A positive pressure environment was not maintained to exclude contamination.
5. Special LCN sterilization procedures to destroy errant DNA were not used.
6. The entire sample was consumed in a single test; no comparison of tests was possible.
7. No sample was retained for future reference. The test can never be reproduced.
8. No negative control tests were run to check for contamination.
9. No control tests to check for field contamination were performed.


As to number 1 the standard 28 cycles was done rather than 32 in LCN testing. In LCN testing the recommended procedure (unlike the standard PCR testing) is not to concentrate the sample (different from the amplification stage). This sample was concentrated. The only repetition possible with Stefanoni's test was a repeat electrophoresis which was done, resulting in a result worse that the first one.

From Amanda's appeal:

That is observed, so that repeat amplification, necessary
according to the above guidelines, is not equivalent to the repetition of the race electrophoresis, carried out by Dr Stefanoni. However, it should be noted that the repeat electrophoresis confirms the unreliability as the result of the second was worse than the first for the loss of information.

Note the quote in this article:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10408000

"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."

 

[Antony]

This is a drop in your posting level in my opinion.
Besides the fact that the statement "Stefanoni invented an untested an unproven procedure for LCN DNA testing" is definitly questionable, the question is not if it is a "good technique", the only question is if evidence was found.

This is an astonishing assertion, because it is the technique used that shows the quality of the evidence obtained. "Evidence" can indeed be obtained by questionable techniques, but it does not have the value of evidence properly obtained. The more flaws shown in the handling of the evidence, the more compromised it becomes.

Evidence was certainly found, where "evidence" stands for the Italian word indizio. The presence of this evidence, Sollecito's DNA on a metal hook, is quite difficult to explain on the basis of the alleged contamination caused by alleged flaws in the technique.

On the contrary, the presence of RS's DNA, or anyone other than Meredith's, is quite difficult to explain on the assumption that it was placed there at the time of the killing. Since the bra was removed by cutting the strap instead of unfastening the clasp, the assailant(s) would have had no occasion to touch the hooks at all.

How, exactly, did RS's DNA come to be on the bra clasp as a result of his alleged participation in the assault? How did the unidentified DNA profiles come to be there? And why are the total readings regarded as evidence implicating RS alone?

I'm sure people here appreciate you continuing to post when the rest of the PMF faction are absent, but I find your reasoning on the evidence to be unconvincing. It's not even clear to me why it convinces you.

 

[Mary_H]

Oh, I understand that all right. It was the exposure in this instance I find puzzling. I have no illusions that evidence has never been manufactured in the US, it's just doing it before TV cameras and announcing it and no one apparently caring much that I'm having difficulty comprehending.

Kaosium, I think you have put your finger on the primary reason it is taking so long to obtain justice for Amanda and Raffaele. When authorities do something so unacceptable and so outrageously opposed to what they are expected to be doing, status quo bias prevents a majority of people from accepting or believing it.

A/K/A resistance and denial.

 

[LondonJohn]

First time poster, hi everyone.
First , it's Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni.Please check your spelling.
Second, she hasn't "invented " any procedure. She just changed the sequencer machine settings. Someone may see it as bad lab practice, others may think it is a novel approach to forensic DNA sequencing. Scientific breaks are often the result of non-standard procedures employed by scientists following a hunch feeling.

I think the investigation is somehow flawed, and Amanda and Raffale could be innocent, but you people are showing a remarkable degree of ignorance of the case, and a high level of xenophoby that surely isn't helping their case

Scientific breaks are indeed often the result of non-standard procedures employed by scientists following a hunch feeling. But these breaks then have to be properly documented, repeated (and repeatable), and peer-reviewed extensively before they can be used operationally.

In the case of LCN DNA testing, exhaustive research has already shown that reliable results can only be determined under the following circumstances: special standards of cleanliness must be followed in the testing lab, including rigorous clean air protocols; and the tests must be repeated at least twice (and preferably three or four times), in order to minimise the possibility of misinterpretation.

Unfortunately, Dr Stefanoni was either ignorant of these important (and agreed) pre-conditions to conducting reliable LCN tests, or she know about them and decided to "freestyle" it herself anyhow. Either way, it's a pretty serious indictment of her scientific credentials that she thought that simply turning the dials (beyond the explicitly marked limits) would do the trick.

Lastly, I do agree that some people do resort to comments that verge on being xenophobic. But I think that most people who argue on here in favour of wrongful convictions are of the belief that these were individual errors of competence, pride, self-preservation or tunnel vision - errors which can be (and are being) made all over the world every day, including in the US and UK.

 

[Mary_H]

Kaosium wrote: [Mignini] manufactured evidence in my opinion, but he did it in plain sight under the glare of scrutiny and no one really seemed to care overmuch....[

It happens in the US. Fred Zain always came up with just what the prosecutor needed, every time. But he was a total fraud.

People get railroaded all over the world. Usually it's not as obvious as this case, and usually it doesn't get anywhere near as much publicity.

quadraginta, if you're interested, this post offers an opportunity for you to expand on your position regarding anecdotes, analogies and evidence, as mentioned in this post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6490843&postcount=12892


References to Fred Zain:
http://www.truthinjustice.org/expertslie.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Zain

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>
Lastly, I do agree that some people do resort to comments that verge on being xenophobic. But I think that most people who argue on here in favour of wrongful convictions are of the belief that these were individual errors of competence, pride, self-preservation or tunnel vision - errors which can be (and are being) made all over the world every day, including in the US and UK.

In my opinion, it's unfair to characterize anti-prosecution comments as xenophobic. Nobody really cares about the perpetrators' nationality; it's just that we can't very well avoid mentioning it periodically. I think it's pretty well agreed among the innocentisti that Mignini is mistaken because he is Mignini, not because he is Italian. In fact, many Italophiles resent him for giving the country a black eye.

Nor is it xenophobic to make casual observations about what make cultures tick. Cultural difference exist; it's okay to explore them. If a comment is made that offends a reader, the reader should cite it and argue for why it is xenophobic, not just make a sweeping statement.

 

[loverofzion]

Welcome to the thread, Bambi. Perhaps you could elaborate on your above point. It might help move the discussion along a bit better than just calling us all ignorant without claiming why.

I think bambi is quite clear about the reasoning behind the ignorance label. By defending the pair on the basis of alleged contamination caused by alleged flaws in the technique were what brought RS's DNA to be found on Meredith's bra clasp is faulty reasoning, reasoning that will prove ultimately unacceptable to the Italian authorities whose decisions determine the outcome of the appeal. He/she is stating unequivocably that the Italian justice system will not be impressed by these arguments.

In addition, bambi seems to feel that the xenophobic comments along the lines of the- Italians-have-it-out-for-the-innocent, offbeat-American by the FOA and the Marriot PR efforts; along with the aspersions cast upon the validity and reliability of the entire system of Justice in Italy --only pour oil on the flame of the weighty burden of evidence of her guilt.

Just my interpretation.

 

[Machiavelli]

You accept that your conclusions regarding the footprint are subjective, even arbitrary. The ratios don’t concern me, but the lack of a system of proof does. You could call it 51%/49%, or whatever you wish. My underlying concern is that you “feel certain”.

Not that this is a problem. That’s the way almost everyone on this board interprets the footprint, I think. Its just that because I cannot get past merely having a feeling or inclination about whose footprint I am looking at, I cannot use it to establish guilt. To me, it looks a lot like Guede’s, but I have not established an objective standard that eliminates Sollecito, so I cannot rule him out. As you yourself point out, you cannot rule out other possibilities either, e.g. Guede.

The name of the person who left that footprint cannot be determined only by studying the footprint. Do you agree?

I would go further and question if you cannot derive a conclusion from examining the footprint, how do you are arrive at your ‘feeling of certainty’? How do you avoid simply seeing what you wish? I certainly give you more credit than that, but you have to admit, reading into to the picture what you will is dangerously tempting.

But all these discussions on "subjectivity" of the footprint are worthless in my opinion. The reasons are several and not worth to unfold them all in this post. Any judgement contains a subjective activity and any witness is subjective. How can you distinguish one person from another? How can you be sure the person is actually the one you recognized? Where does your feeling of certainity originate from? Can you always prove your observations or translate your result into a mathemetic theorem? Maybe you feel more the need of "objective standards" rather than I do, and you may wish to rule out human factors, but you may well have a human reason for your position: the idea you express constitutes a human factor as well.
Moreover, I think there are arguments, some of which I expressed, to indicate why the interpretation of the footprint and its features. I don't express, like others, the judgement that "the print looks like". I can offer articulation and consistency. Then, the whole thing then must be put into the context of a trial dialectics: an essential part of the decision is made by the defence argumentations. Whether they are able to convince, to deal with the other argukents, or not. The point is not just if I have a subjective feeling, it is if the defence arguments are able to attack the arguments supporting my certainity. The weakness of defensive arguments becomes a crucial element.
Finally, you must always bear well in mind that the most important aspect of the pieces of evidence is their being many, in a system, consistent with each other.

 

[Chris C]

I think bambi is quite clear about the reasoning behind the ignorance label. By defending the pair on the basis of alleged contamination caused by alleged flaws in the technique were what brought RS's DNA to be found on Meredith's bra clasp is faulty reasoning, reasoning that will prove ultimately unacceptable to the Italian authorities whose decisions determine the outcome of the appeal. He/she is stating unequivocably that the Italian justice system will not be impressed by these arguments.

In addition, bambi seems to feel that the xenophobic comments along the lines of the- Italians-have-it-out-for-the-innocent, offbeat-American by the FOA and the Marriot PR efforts; along with the aspersions cast upon the validity and reliability of the entire system of Justice in Italy --only pour oil on the flame of the weighty burden of evidence of her guilt.

Just my interpretation.

Its not just contamination. Nearly everything to do with the bra clasp and knife is disputed.

 

[Mary_H]

I think bambi is quite clear about the reasoning behind the ignorance label. By defending the pair on the basis of alleged contamination caused by alleged flaws in the technique were what brought RS's DNA to be found on Meredith's bra clasp is faulty reasoning, reasoning that will prove ultimately unacceptable to the Italian authorities whose decisions determine the outcome of the appeal. He/she is stating unequivocably that the Italian justice system will not be impressed by these arguments.

In addition, bambi seems to feel that the xenophobic comments along the lines of the- Italians-have-it-out-for-the-innocent, offbeat-American by the FOA and the Marriot PR efforts; along with the aspersions cast upon the validity and reliability of the entire system of Justice in Italy --only pour oil on the flame of the weighty burden of evidence of her guilt.

Just my interpretation.

Can you or bambi establish that any xenophobic comments have been made in this thread?

 

[Machiavelli]

The post to which I refer was #7352, back on page 184. It contains a number of errors, but what I noticed at the time was this:

He did not move her right after the stabbing, because the body remained near the closet for some time and was moved only after at least 10-15 minutes as the coddling of the blood stains shows.

This is flatly contradicted by the crime scene photos. Meredith was moved from the spot where her throat was cut, in front of the wardrobe, to the spot where she was found, with her head adjacent to the left side panel of the wardrobe, while she was still alive (albeit barely alive) and gasping for breath. Experts have determined that because the same aspirated blood spatter that appears on the wardrobe doors also appears on the side panel.

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/wardrobe_side_panel.jpg

Also, the volume of blood found at that location shows that her heart was still beating, causing blood to actively flow from her wounds. People don't bleed like that after they are dead. And Meredith most certainly did not survive for 15 minutes after she received that enormous slashing wound to her throat.

You have bought into a ridiculous fable because you don't have the facts particular to this case, and you lack even the most basic knowledge of criminal investigations in general. Certainly you are not in a position to critique Steve Moore.

I disagree on several points, first of all to the statement "Meredith certainly did not survive 15 minutes". The posssible dynamics of her death do not allow us to estimate the timing of her death with this precision. Even the seconds or minutes tha passed between the first and the last wound are an unknown time.

Then, you are pointing to a detail frankly of secondary value. You are just speaking about the timing that occurred between the stabbing and moving of the body. The pattern on the wardrobe side means really little. What has a logical value is the evidence this movement of the body occurred, and in addition there are indications that a movement occurred later after the stabbing. Any (only possible, imho) evidence that movements occurred also before while she was alive do not have a logical value, because they cannot exclude anything. The evidence of actions made after her death, movement and alteration of the scene later after her death are multiple and very obvious.

While a very important aspect is the lack of prints on her body, which would he impossible if her body was closely manipulated by a person after her death in the context of a sexual violence. No bloody prints or bloody smearings consistent with manipulation were found on her breast and on her body, this obviously rules out the possibility that somebody had a close sexual contact her after the stabbing.

Othr macroscpic elements contribute to the picture, like the duvet on her body. But the story would be long.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>
Finally, you must always bear well in mind that the most important aspect of the pieces of evidence is their being many, in a system, consistent with each other.

I agree. Since there is no other legitimate evidence against Raffaele, and a great deal of evidence that he was arrested without cause, why spend so much time speculating on whether that is his footprint?