Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[LondonJohn]

I've read the rules for Major League Baseball yet i still can't play in the majors.

Ermm.... that might be because you need extraordinary special skills (e.g. hand/eye coordination, physical strength) and thousands of hours of practice to stand a chance of being a major league baseball player. No special skills or practice (beyond maybe a week) are needed to be able to collect forensic evidence. And anyhow, these guys were supposed to be in the "major league" of forensics specialists in Italy. Mignini even explicitly said so. Yet apparently they did not know the rules of their own game. Interesting.

 

[Kaosium]

The law doesn't work that way in either Italy (as I understand it) and the United States (which I do).

A final conviction in Italy means one of two things. She does her time in Italy or asks for a prisoner transfer to the United States where....she does her time.

Actually it goes to the EU then.

I'm not talking about Amanda requesting a prisoner transfer to the US either. I'm talking about the government of Italy kicking the courts in the teeth for making fools of themselves convicting Amanda Knox all the way through. There's a number of reasons to think the political establishment in Italy is not exactly pleased with their court system, in some cases personal reasons.

At any rate, perhaps I am wrong, but I recall reading on a site not exactly dedicated to the innocence of Amanda Knox that it was vitally 'important' to keep beating the drums of guilt lest the Italian government just repatriate her and have her walking the streets of Seattle murdering other girls for no reason. That information could be in error, in which case I'd have to reconsider what I said.

 

[Kaosium]

Extradition is not about determining guilty or innocence. It is a formal request based on treaties between nations.

Which can be denied for a number of reasons, one being the asking country cannot provide evidence to support their request.

There's a number of European countries who won't extradite to the US if they think there's a possibility the defendant will be subject to the death penalty. It doesn't bother me a whit, I agree with them.

 

[LondonJohn]

What we can clearly see is what seems to be a bunch of incompetents acting in radical violation of basic rules of forensics.

All they needed to do was pick up the item with sterile tweezers, put it in a sterile bag, and leave. What's so hard about that?

Whenever I see posters trying to defend the police's handling of the bra clasp, or the swabbing/wiping of samples (especially if they try to claim that this is entirely normal practice), I immediately recognise that these posters are either incapable of decent reasoning and/or they are blindly biased towards the safety of the convictions. I'd have so much more respect for their opinions if they were to agree that the collection methods were terribly substandard - probably to the extent that they negate the evidential value of the items collected - but that they believe Knox and Sollecito to be guilty regardless. It verges on the pathetic to see people defending such incredibly unprofessional forensic collection techniques with a straight face.

 

[Mary_H]

It's hard to imagine what the audio would say.

'Guys, could you please hold the bra clasp in your dirty gloves, give it a good rub, shine some torches on it, pass it around, then put it on the floor'.

I provided a translation back in August on the West Seattle Herald thread. My Italian is a bit basic, so I might not have caught all the idioms.

...........................................................................

I don't think we're going to find any citations regarding the test(s) that uncovered Raffaele's DNA on Meredith's bra clasp, unless Mignini and his minions were audio-taping themselves along about the middle of December, when one of them slapped himself on the forehead and said, "Doh! We don't have any evidence against Sollecito!"

"Mamma mia, what do we do now?!" exclaimed another Perugian genius, who, with his collaboratori, had taken the full six weeks to realize that a knife from Raffaele's kitchen didn't put him at the murder scene unless it had Raffaele's DNA on it as well as Amanda's.

"Well, look," says Mignini. "I'm stupid, and you're all stupid, so the rest of the world must be stupid, too, right?" A murmur of smug agreement passes through the crowd.

"All's we have to do is go over to the crime scene, find something, and SAY Raffaele's DNA is on it. Who's gonna question us? Nobody in Perugia, that's for sure! Just in case, though, let's bring a camcorder and tape the "discovery" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) for those damn nosy Americans."

If you have ever seen the videotape, you know the whole thing was played completely for laughs -- broad, broad slapstick. There's no sound, but you can kind of make up the dialog as you go along.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMaTI0SiuLw

"Whoa, is that a bra clasp?"
"Heck, I think that IS a bra clasp!"
"Well, lemme turn it over in my fingers a bunch of times, to see if it changes into something that's not a bra clasp."
"Nope, still looks like a bra clasp to me."
"Here, you hold it, what do you think?"
"Well, lemme turn it over in MY fingers a few more times, just to give the camera a better angle.... well, I'll be -- it's still a bra clasp!"
"Wait, shine this really bright flashlight on it, see if anything happens."
"Hmmm. Nope, still a bra clasp."
"Well, put it back on the floor by this tag with the letter Y, that'll make it look like that's where we found it."
"Keep the camera and the flashlight on it for another thirty seconds, in case we didn't get a enough pictures of it in the first two minutes of this video."
"Hey, I got an idea, Larry -- crush it with your foot!!"
"HAR, HAR, HAR, knock it off, Curly!"
"Okay, okay, come on, guys, let's pick it back up and put it the plastic bag to 'take to the lab.'" (stifles a chuckle)
"Watch it! Don't let it touch the sterile plastic bag -- you might knock off some of the stuff we got all over it from our gloves and the floor."

(Aside from the over-handling, that poor little scrap had so much heat pointed at it it's hard to believe whatever DNA might have been on there originally didn't melt or fry.)

Next step? Mignini calls Stefanoni -- "Hey, Patti? Do you have any pictures of what Sollecito's DNA looks like?"

"Sure, the one from when we first took him in. You know -- the one we compared to every single solitary DNA test we did but could never come up with a match?"

"Oh yeah, that one. Great! Well, look, I've got a match for ya now. Work your magic and make a copy of that picture, but label it 'bra clasp DNA,' okay?" I'll hang on to the bra clasp; you just send me the paperwork. Are we good?"

"You betcha, Chief!"

(Yeah, she's a little bit of a Sarah Palin wannabe -- who isn't?)

http://www.westseattleherald.com/20...motivation-document-first-english-tra?page=15

 

[LondonJohn]

Really?

Exaggerate much?

If you were to assert that the video provides evidence of circumstances where contamination might have occurred I'd stand behind you all the way. Thanks to Halides1 we can be assured that such circumstances always exist, though, so this is not particularly useful information.

You seem to be claiming that you can actually see DNA being transferred from one surface to another in that video. I'm afraid that I have to view this claim with a bit more skepticism.


One way could have been by Sollecito grabbing hold of it. Exactly when that may have happened is a different question.

How would Sollecito (or anyone, for that matter) be able to grab the hook of the clasp while the bra was still being worn. The hooks are covered by material. All the evidence suggests that whoever removed the bra tried to simply pull it apart by grabbing the material either side of the clasp area. The bending of the hook supports this. And, as Charlie has mentioned, it may well be that the material near the clasp actually tore free, rather than being cut free. If so, this lends even more weight to the theory that someone pulled very hard on the rear material near to the shoulder straps (making the hook bend), but that the material ripped before the hooks failed.

Anyhow, regardless of whether the bra tore apart or was cut apart, there's no reason why anyone would have been placing their fingers onto the hooks themselves. If they had indeed bothered to lift up the flap of material to expose the hooks, they would have seen how the hooks engaged, and would have removed the bra in the conventional way - by pushing the two sides together to disengage the hooks. The very fact that the bra was instead either ripped or cut open strongly indicates that whoever removed it never got as far as examining the hooks.

 

[platonov]

Confusion may indeed be your epitaph or the name of the movie

Actually it goes to the EU then.

I'm not talking about Amanda requesting a prisoner transfer to the US either. I'm talking about the government of Italy kicking the courts in the teeth for making fools of themselves convicting Amanda Knox all the way through. There's a number of reasons to think the political establishment in Italy is not exactly pleased with their court system, in some cases personal reasons.

<snip>

Kaosium

This argument appears very confused even by your standards
You started with .........

Originally Posted by Kaosium
In any case my guess is Amanda goes back to the US even in the unlikely event of all appeals--including to the EU--failing, and odds are will be effectively a free woman the moment she steps off the plane.

How would she be out of prison and back in the U.S. even if all her appeals fail?........

Originally Posted by Kaosium
For the same reasons she's been imprisoned for three years and is still considered a 'flight risk.'

This makes no sense............

Originally Posted by Kaosium
I disagree. There's no reason to think she's a 'flight risk' if they think she'd be sent right back by the US.

Why wouldn't they send her back [this isn't about extradition its prisoner transfer etc etc]..........

Originally Posted by Kaosium
No evidence. There's no reason for the US to try to cover-up the failings of the Perugian police nor the ridiculous imaginings of Mignini.

And now we are back to The Italian govt will let her go
AS they don't care about foreign nationals committing crimes in their state
OR they don't care about crimes committed against foreign nationals in their state
OR they are embarrassed about something
OR they can release prisoners on a whim as they don't like the justice system

OR the EU will or wont do something about it.

The movie idea was simpler and more coherent (and it had a cheerleader)

.

 

[daydreamer]

To me it looks like it was partially torn and maybe cut the rest of the way. LOL. I wonder how strong that metal clasp is. It almost appears to me to be bent open far enough that the bra would not need to be torn or cut.

Originally I thought it was cut but after taking a closer look at the photo using Charlie's link, I am convinced it was torn off for the following reasons. In the photo below, note the clean cut edges of the bra material. Also note the stitch lines that run parallel to the edge of the material. There seems to be an edging piece missing on the bra. The location where the clasp material attaches to the bra also has a parallel stitch line. Apprently the stiching threads on the edging and claps material were the first to tear. The bra material is different than the clasp material, so if the bra was cut off I would expect that there would be a piece of clasp material on the bra or vice versa. For greater resolution, go to Charlie's link and checkout figure 6.

http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/Me...Ron_Hendry.pdf

 

[Mary_H]

Is it deliberate contamination, accidential contamination, planted evidence or simply not his DNA at all? Why is it that those who believe in AK and RS's innocence can't decide on one theory?<snip>

Doesn't it bother you that the judges, or Mignini for that matter, couldn't decide on one theory?

 

[Antony]

If you were to assert that the video provides evidence of circumstances where contamination might have occurred I'd stand behind you all the way. Thanks to Halides1 we can be assured that such circumstances always exist, though, so this is not particularly useful information.

These aren't normal circumstances in which investigators have taken all precautions to exclude contamination. Had they done so then the evidence could be regarded as of use - but it would still need to be interpreted in the context of possible contamination.

What we have here is investigators showing utter recklessness with the evidence, and at the same time there are people commenting on the case describing this level of investigation as "a mountain of evidence", "overwhelming evidence", "incontrovertible" and the like. It's just surreal.

You seem to be claiming that you can actually see DNA being transferred from one surface to another in that video. I'm afraid that I have to view this claim with a bit more skepticism

Clutching at straws. You don't have to be able to see the DNA in order to know that the sample is almost inevitably being contaminated in these shots. Along with uncertain physical contamination comes certainty of contamination of its status as meaningful evidence.

One way could have been by Sollecito grabbing hold of it. Exactly when that may have happened is a different question.

Doesn't answer the question either way. There is no occasion for anyone taking part in the attack on Meredith to "grab hold" of the clasp hooks at all. Anyone doing so would grasp the fabric of the bra, not the hooks.

 

[Mary_H]

I'm glad my kid isn't an honor student!

Maybe it's taking all those difficult classes that makes them snap:

"Honor Student Charged with Felony Theft Over Sunglass Snafu."
"From honor student to accused cop killer"
"Kansas woman accused of leaving baby in trash was once an honor student"
"Honor student on trial for robbery at gunpoint"

And those headlines were from just the first Google page.

That's why they're headlines. All of those crimes happen every day, but they're more newsworthy when someone unexpected is accused of committing them.

 

[Alt+F4]

And now we are back to The Italian govt will let her go
AS they don't care about foreign nationals committing crimes in their state
OR they don't care about crimes committed against foreign nationals in their state
OR they are embarrassed about something
OR they can release prisoners on a whim as they don't like the justice system

OR the EU will or wont do something about it.

The movie idea was simpler and more coherent (and it had a cheerleader)

Well maybe it's part of new Italian tourism campaign: "Come to Italy and murder with impunity!"

 

[Mary_H]

The handle was very long, the blade only 6 or 7", total was 34cm as I recall. The handle was longer than the blade. My Henkel with 8" blade is 32.5cm, my Victorinox with 8" blade (camping knife) is slightly shorter.

My 'usual' kitchen knife has a 10" blade, and is 39cm long.

They were going on a picnic the next day (or so they claim), a knife would be a standard tool to bring. So, that's a good explanation for why Amanda had it in her bag.

I agree with, Rose, Tom. This is a much better possible explanation than the ones the judges came up with.

 

[Kaosium]

And now we are back to The Italian govt will let her go
AS they don't care about foreign nationals committing crimes in their state
OR they don't care about crimes committed against foreign nationals in their state
OR they are embarrassed about something
OR they can release prisoners on a whim as they don't like the justice system

OR the EU will or wont do something about it.

The movie idea was simpler and more coherent.

.

Maybe there's a reason I chose this user name then.

To boil it down let me just say I think there are many reasons Amanda and Raffaele will be free in the end. I don't think any US attorney would consider the 'evidence' collected to be anything but the desperation of a corrupt prosecution, which is why they can't take the chance she'd leave Italy. I also think the Italian courts are on their own here, bereft of solid support from the Italian government, the EU and the Italian people, the vast majority of whom could apparently care less according to what I've been reading.

 

[Kaosium]

Well maybe it's part of new Italian tourism campaign: "Come to Italy and murder with impunity!"

I don't think in the end there will be many people at all who really think Amanda Knox or Raffaele Sollecito murdered anyone.

There will be some of course, and they are entitled to their opinion.

 

[Draca]

Blood mark under Meredith's bed

__________________________________

Draca,

I can find no reason to believe Hendry's theory. There's a simple explanation for the presence of those two marks of blood under Meredith's bed, and the cops probably knew the correct explanation. (See photographs in above LINK.) They were left by Meredith herself, the night of her death, with one of her hands, while she was still alive, and on the floor. There was blood on both of Meredith's hands (See Massei Report, English Translation, page 110). There is no "splash" effect in the blood drops---which contradicts Hendry's expectations---because her hand was on or near the floor. The right blood trace even bears a similarity to the pattern of fingers on a person's hand.

On the day Meredith's body was discovered, November 2, 2007, both of the blood traces were covered. The blood trace on the left covered by the Power Strip, the one on the right covered by a large shopping bag. There's a simple explanation. The large shopping bag was probably never moved much during the assault. Meredith's hand slipped under the bag to leave that blood trace, leaving the trace covered by the bag. The power strip came to cover the left blood trace when her arm then became entangled with the lamp cord, which dislodged the lamp from the nightstand and also pulled the Power Strip over that blood trace. So Meredith's actions caused the blood traces and her actions covered the blood traces.
///

Fine,

This is not logical following the path of the attack around the bedroom. The attack started near the bed - pushed back mattress, lamp on the floor, finger streaks on wall between bedside table and bed. It then moved across the room to near the window and the desk - pushed in chair, torn paper, blood with hair and ended up with Meredith'd head between the wardrobe and the other side of the bedside table. There is no indication that Meredith was on the floor near the bed. That is on the opposite side of the room.

On the day Meredith's body was discovered, November 2, 2007, both of the blood traces were covered.

Cite? Where are the Nov 2-4 photos of the blood spot under the bed if they existed? Also, no blood or bloody prints noted on shopping bag and powerstrip.

Meredith's hand slipped under the bag to leave that blood trace, leaving the trace covered by the bag. The power strip came to cover the left blood trace when her arm then became entangled with the lamp cord, which dislodged the lamp from the nightstand and also pulled the Power Strip over that blood trace. So Meredith's actions caused the blood traces and her actions covered the blood traces.

This is fabrication. The bedframe is a stable object. You can see in the photos that the the two blood marks are not in the same location. The police covered the first blood marks when they moved the bedside table. Why did they cover blood evidence? Do you have a reaon for them doing this? There is no documentation of the second blood spot until Dec 18th. You can see in the Dec 18th photo the pile of shoes including the bloody boots that were shoved under around the bed. Since there is no documentation of the blood spot until Dec 18th, when the power cord and shopping bag had to have been removed before the shoes were placed there. Why do you believe they would not have noticed and photographed this blood spot after removing those items and before putting the shoes under the bed?

Meredith's head was found resting on one of those boots. The pumas she was wearing when attacked are also in that pile. Why are they not considered prime evidence but instead tossed into the pile? What correct police procedure recommends this action?

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>

============================

All of which is irrelevant to my question to Mary_H.

Do you concur with her assertion that "... as far as most of us know, most knife-killers dispose of their murder weapons after use."? Can you provide some data to support it?

I ask this because, quite frankly, I don't know, and was rather surprised to see such a claim made as an argument in defense of Knox and Sollecito. It may well be true, but I have not run across such an assertion before.

You really don't know, quadraginta? Do you really want to go there?

Out of the somewhat limited knowledge of the sum total of knife murders contained in the brains of the posters on this thread, you want to establish a measure of whether more of them are aware of weapons being kept or being tossed after murders? Okay, take a survey.

I will be happy to change my claim to, "as far as I know...," if that will make you happy.

Can you spell pedantry?

 

[Antony]

Well maybe it's part of new Italian tourism campaign: "Come to Italy and murder with impunity!"

More like: "Come to Italy; but if you come across a murder, just go somewhere else and don't get involved. If you do anything to help the police, expect to be arrested as the prime suspect."

Come to think, that's exactly what happens in miscarriages of justice all over the world.

 

[TomCH]

Rafaelle already carried knives suitable for a picnic which he already used to cut food items.

You've obviously never been on a picnic, his knives were all far too small.

 

[platonov]

Maybe there's a reason I chose this user name then.

To boil it down let me just say I think there are many reasons Amanda and Raffaele will be free in the end. I don't think any US attorney would consider the 'evidence' collected to be anything but the desperation of a corrupt prosecution, which is why they can't take the chance she'd leave Italy. I also think the Italian courts are on their own here, bereft of solid support from the Italian government, the EU and the Italian people, the vast majority of whom could apparently care less according to what I've been reading.

What, She is doing 26 years - she is not going to leave Italy unless she beats the rap or goes for prisoner transfer, which has already been explained to you by Alt+F4.
[OK There is also the special forces/covert ops idea but thats obviously hush hush ]

Its not an X-factor vote - they have courts for this stuff !

Admit it ... you are posting these arguments to make the Foakers look bad

I suspect you are far from alone in this.

.