Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris_Halkides]

plausible scenarios

So your theory is: Raffaele left a DNA trace on a towel, a towel was used on Mederith and this towel transferred Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp (meanwhile this had been cut and fell was covered by the pillow btw).

I don't know what Katy_did proposed but I don't see any reasonable theory for such a transfer.
I note 1) this theory would rule out forensic contamination; 2) Sollecito's defence didn't propose this theory, and didn't request further DNA tests on the towels; 3) a relation between the towel and the metal hooks of the bra clasp would be obviously weak: for a towel to carry and then deposit one DNA trace right on that point is simply an unlikely dynamic and a remote hypothesiys.
There were many dozens of skin cells dried, presed and adhering to the metal surface. Describe this finding in a realistic dynamic. The obvious and almost the only explanation is somebody touched the item.

Machiavelli,

I did not say that the defense asked for further testing of the towels (poor storage has rendered the towels less useful than they would have been). The amount of Raffaele's (putative) profile was in the ballpark of 100-200 picograms of DNA. I am not sure where your "many dozens of skin cells" idea comes from.

The scenario Katy_did proposed and which I modified involved transfer from the towels to the clasp on the assumption that the bra clasp was stepped on wihile covered by the towels. Katy envisioned one extra step involving Rudy's shoe. This would not be contamination, but it would be secondary or tertiary transfer. It is just one scenario; contamination could have happened by several means. If the prosecution would release the egrams of the negative controls, it would be a start toward ruling out contamination. However, given the way the clasp was handled, contamination during collection remains quite plausible.

 

[Withnail1969]

So your theory is: Raffaele left a DNA trace on a towel, a towel was used on Mederith

Yet again you're misspelling 'Meredith', I only point this out because it seems to be an unforgivable offence according to your friends.

 

[Chris C]

THERE
ARE
NO
"3 unidentified people"

There is only an opinion of an expert on loci that could be from someone who is not Sollecito. This is normal, and means nothing.

If there are no unidentified people, then thats not his profile. Plain and Simple.

 

[TomCH]

Wrong. She isn't officially guilty until her final appeal fails.

But she is still convicted.

 

[Chris C]

excuse me cutting down your full comment,

but would you share when/where you think all these people left the DNA on the bra clasp?

and has the prosecution/forensic expert accepted there are other DNA to "unidentified people" on the bra clasp?

6 loci don't match?

I could only give an opinion of how it got there. I honestly believe all the dna on the clasp got there from the floor and/or improper handling. However, guilters want people to believe that Sollecito only managed to leave his dna on the metal clasp of a bra that was cut off. The same bra that had Guede's dna on it. The problem with the logic is the DNA on the clasp is a mixed sample, regardless of how much gulters denies it. Meredith, the fabled Sollecito profile, and enough additional dna that can't rule out 3 more unidentifed people.

What the crack forensics team in Perugia want you to believe is you can place a value on how DNA got on the clasp without knowing how it got there. Meredith's DNA, thats kinda obvious. As for the remaining dna. Since NONE of the remaining dna is found anywhere else in the ROOM, then all that DNA most likely arrived by the same means. Yet guilters want to put a different value on the conjured Sollecito profile and say the remaining DNA has no value. Yet its obvious it all arrived on the clasp the same way, so it all has the same value.

 

[Chris C]

Machiavelli,

I did not say that the defense asked for further testing of the towels (poor storage has rendered the towels less useful than they would have been). The amount of Raffaele's (putative) profile was in the ballpark of 100-200 picograms of DNA. I am not sure where your "many dozens of skin cells" idea comes from.

The scenario Katy_did proposed and which I modified involved transfer from the towels to the clasp on the assumption that the bra clasp was stepped on wihile covered by the towels. Katy envisioned one extra step involving Rudy's shoe. This would not be contamination, but it would be secondary or tertiary transfer. It is just one scenario; contamination could have happened by several means. If the prosecution would release the egrams of the negative controls, it would be a start toward ruling out contamination. However, given the way the clasp was handled, contamination during collection remains quite plausible.

Its my understanding that the prosecution won't release those because those controls where not done on the knife.

 

[Withnail1969]

But she is still convicted.

Try 'a preliminary decision has been made which indicates she may have committed the crime'. Putting it that way makes more sense since otherwise you run into the absurdity that she has been convicted but isn't yet guilty.

 

[Justinian2]

Wrong.

She is convicted of murder, that makes her by definition a killer.

Wrong!

Would you have followed the Nazi party? Or would you have said they were wrong and resisted?

Good people don't blindly assume that their government (or another government) is correct.

 

[LondonJohn]

Try 'a preliminary decision has been made which indicates she may have committed the crime'. Putting it that way makes more sense since otherwise you run into the absurdity that she has been convicted but isn't yet guilty.

Well, I would have thought that the most appropriate thing to say - if one wanted to be strictly accurate - was that she was convicted in the lower court of assize, in the first trial. However, I don't have a problem with people referring to Knox and Sollecito as convicted murderers/killers, as a shorthand for the actual situation. The have both been convicted in a court of law of the crime of murder, so it's clearly appropriate to apply the terms "convicted murderer/killer", even though these are emotive words.

Incidentally, one can be convicted of murder even if one didn't actually cause the fatal injuries. The law of joint enterprise means that if the person could reasonably have been expected to know that an unlawful death was a possible outcome of the enterprise, and that he/she committed acts in furtherance of the enterprise.

There was a very famous case in the UK in the 1950s highlighting joint enterprise: two young criminals, Derek Bentley and Christopher Craig, were cornered by police on the roof of a factory which they were intending to rob. Bentley had already been apprehended by one of the policemen when Craig shot another policeman dead with a revolver which he had with him - and which Bentley knew Craig was carrying. Both Bentley and Craig were convicted of murder, under the joint enterprise laws, since Bentley had known that Craig was carrying a revolver (whose only purpose would have been to kill someone if necessary), and because the murder was seen as a continuance of the armed robbery. The case became especially famous because Craig - who'd fired the gun - was under 18 at the time of the murder, so he escaped the death penalty, but Bentley - who was aged 20 - was hanged.

 

[shuttlt]

Wrong!

Would you have followed the Nazi party? Or would you have said they were wrong and resisted?

Good people don't blindly assume that their government (or another government) is correct.

Doubtless, not the first on this interminable thread, but... Godwin?

 

[ElsieEthrington]

On the metal hook.

Thanks, Mary. My theory is that RG yanked the bra's back to force it off, unbending the hooks some, but not enough to remove it. He then grew impatient and cut it off with the same knife he used to stab her to death.

The police planted RS's DNA on the hook when their previous "evidence" of footprints at the scene matching RS's sneakers fell through. The timing of the "discovery" of the clasp and the elaborate video presentation of its gathering strongly suggests this.

I understand the prosecution presented the jury a CGI video restaging the murder. Presumably this has a depiction of RS handling the metal hook but little else?

Can anyone tell me the prosecution's theory of how the DNA got there?

 

[LondonJohn]

Ahhh and so the classless personal attacks continue elsewhere...

Apparently Lumumba should have appeared to Knox to have been just as likely as every other resident of Perugia to have been involved in the murder. What, then, are we to make of Perugia Police Chief De Felice's statement on the 6th November that Knox "buckled and made an admission of fact we knew to be correct"? This statement clearly implies that the police "knew" Lumumba was involved before they even started questioning Knox on the 5th/6th. But of course it's convenient for some people to "forget" this interesting little fact.

Knox didn't name Lumumba out of thin air. I believe the following: she named Lumumba because the police told her that he was involved and that she had met up with him that night, as per the "see you later" text message. They told her that they knew this was what had happened, and that she was either lying if she said otherwise, or she'd subconsciously blocked that night's events from her mind.

And one last thing: Knox said on the stand that she realised by the 10th November that the only evidence the police had against Lumumba was her accusation of him. But how can Knox possibly have known this by this time? Did the police tell her or her lawyers that they had no other evidence against Lumumba? IIRC, the police were still chasing the SIM-card-switching angle, and the mysterious cellphone ping "near the cottage" at that time. I don't think there's any reason how Knox could have known on the 10th that it was only her accusation that was keeping Lumumba in prison - especially if the genesis of the naming of Lumumba had actually come from the police themselves. After all, they apparently "knew" Lumumba was involved before the interrogation of Knox even started.

 

[LondonJohn]

Thanks, Mary. My theory is that RG yanked the bra's back to force it off, unbending the hooks some, but not enough to remove it. He then grew impatient and cut it off with the same knife he used to stab her to death.

The police planted RS's DNA on the hook when their previous "evidence" of footprints at the scene matching RS's sneakers fell through. The timing of the "discovery" of the clasp and the elaborate video presentation of its gathering strongly suggests this.

I understand the prosecution presented the jury a CGI video restaging the murder. Presumably this has a depiction of RS handling the metal hook but little else?
Can anyone tell me the prosecution's theory of how the DNA got there?

And this to me is the elephant in the room, so far as the DNA-on-the-bra-clasp issue goes. It seems impossible that Sollecito would have deposited skin cell DNA on the tiny metal hook, yet apparently nowhere else on the entire bra - including the material surrounding and covering the hooks.

 

[Withnail1969]

Doubtless, not the first on this interminable thread, but... Godwin?

Godwin was invoked months ago.

 

[Withnail1969]

There was a very famous case in the UK in the 1950s highlighting joint enterprise: two young criminals, Derek Bentley and Christopher Craig, were cornered by police on the roof of a factory which they were intending to rob. Bentley had already been apprehended by one of the policemen when Craig shot another policeman dead with a revolver which he had with him - and which Bentley knew Craig was carrying. Both Bentley and Craig were convicted of murder, under the joint enterprise laws, since Bentley had known that Craig was carrying a revolver (whose only purpose would have been to kill someone if necessary), and because the murder was seen as a continuance of the armed robbery. The case became especially famous because Craig - who'd fired the gun - was under 18 at the time of the murder, so he escaped the death penalty, but Bentley - who was aged 20 - was hanged.

There was a well known 'Mary Whitehouse Experience' sketch in the early 90s about this case.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PFWtZIqcKc

Now, back on topic.

 

[shuttlt]

Godwin was invoked months ago.

I know, I've been out of this thread long enough I couldn't remember any specific instances. Still in comparison to the threads on Israel this is small time stuff.

 

[Withnail1969]

I know, I've been out of this thread long enough I couldn't remember any specific instances. Still in comparison to the threads on Israel this is small time stuff.

You surely aren't telling me this isn't the biggest thread on JREF?

 

[platonov]

More repressed memories

Ahhh and so the classless personal attacks continue elsewhere...

Apparently Lumumba should have appeared to Knox to have been just as likely as every other resident of Perugia to have been involved in the murder. What, then, are we to make of Perugia Police Chief De Felice's statement on the 6th November that Knox "buckled and made an admission of fact we knew to be correct"? This statement clearly implies that the police "knew" Lumumba was involved before they even started questioning Knox on the 5th/6th. But of course it's convenient for some people to "forget" this interesting little fact.

Knox didn't name Lumumba out of thin air. I believe the following: she named Lumumba because the police told her that he was involved and that she had met up with him that night, as per the "see you later" text message. They told her that they knew this was what had happened, and that she was either lying if she said otherwise, or she'd subconsciously blocked that night's events from her mind.

And one last thing: Knox said on the stand that she realised by the 10th November that the only evidence the police had against Lumumba was her accusation of him. But how can Knox possibly have known this by this time? Did the police tell her or her lawyers that they had no other evidence against Lumumba? IIRC, the police were still chasing the SIM-card-switching angle, and the mysterious cellphone ping "near the cottage" at that time. I don't think there's any reason how Knox could have known on the 10th that it was only her accusation that was keeping Lumumba in prison - especially if the genesis of the naming of Lumumba had actually come from the police themselves. After all, they apparently "knew" Lumumba was involved before the interrogation of Knox even started.

What ?

Have you forgotten both your own logic & AK's direct testimony already

She knew PL was innocent because a) she was involved in the crime & also admitted in court that by the 10th she 'knew' that he was only being held due to her words.

On the second part : She could hardly deny it - they had the tape*.
And this also gives lie to the idea that the cops suggested PL's name.

She obviously knew it was a lie when she first said it but that's a different point, your beliefs and rationalisations notwithstanding. This issue has been thrashed out already.

* Mary H thinks all parties are wrong on what this tape reveals - whether she can back up this assertion & provide an explanation as to why everyone else in court, including AK and her lawyer, is lying/mistaken on this point remains to be seen.
I predict not.

 

[katy_did]

So your theory is: Raffaele left a DNA trace on a towel, a towel was used on Mederith and this towel transferred Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp (meanwhile this had been cut and fell was covered by the pillow btw).

I don't know what Katy_did proposed but I don't see any reasonable theory for such a transfer.
I note 1) this theory would rule out forensic contamination; 2) Sollecito's defence didn't propose this theory, and didn't request further DNA tests on the towels; 3) a relation between the towel and the metal hooks of the bra clasp would be obviously weak: for a towel to carry and then deposit one DNA trace right on that point is simply an unlikely dynamic and a remote hypothesiys.

One of the reasons I suggested the hand towels as a possible source of contamination is that of all the places on which someone might leave their DNA, a bathroom hand towel would have to be a pretty strong candidate. Stefanoni actually argued - wrongly, according to the defence - that a 'rubbing' action is necessary to deposit DNA. Well with that theory, the action of someone drying their hands on the towel would be very likely to leave DNA.

Sollecito would almost certainly have used Amanda and Meredith's bathroom at some point during his visits, most likely on the day of 1 November when he'd cooked dinner at the cottage. The towels, of course, were taken from the small bathroom and were found next to and underneath the body, while the bra clasp was found in the same area (underneath the pillow to be sure, but there's no particular reason to think that was the case throughout the attack and its aftermath). DNA transfer from the bath towels would also explain the possible traces of DNA from other people on the clasp, especially given that those other people would most likely be Laura and Filomena; Sollecito could be identified through the Y chromosome test, while if the other contributors were all female, they would be much more difficult to identify.

I think your path of reasoning in assessing the probability of transfer from the towels is a little flawed (that the towel depositing DNA on just that spot is unlikely). Exactly the same argument can be made for the extreme unlikelihood of Sollecito depositing his DNA on just that point, even if he took part in the attack. What are the chances of Sollecito happening to not only touch the tiny metal hook of the bra, but also happening to leave his DNA on it - and not doing so on anything else in the room? Think of how many tests the scientific police did, how many traces of blood they tested - and Sollecito's DNA was only found on that one tiny spot! The odds are astronomical. Yet if we believe the scientific police, his DNA is there.

The point is that both arguments as to how the DNA got there are extremely unlikely, and there's no reason to think transfer from the towel is less probable than direct contact during the attack (note: you can't say 'it was more likely through direct contact because he cut the bra clasp', because the only evidence we have that he cut the bra clasp is the DNA itself - the reasoning would be circular). And in fact, given that his DNA was found nowhere else, it could be argued that transfer from the towels or elsewhere is more likely than direct contact, which surely would have left some other trace. However, I'm happy to say that both theories are equally likely (or unlikely).

I agree that this theory would rule out forensic contamination, but I'm not sure that makes it any less probable. In terms of testing the towels, I don't think any of them could be accurately tested; one of them had mildewed, and the other two were too saturated with blood to properly test (this is one reason given by the judge in Guede's appeal for refusing further testing on the towels).

 

[platonov]

Confusion, lies & Video?tape

I was careless with my use of the term

<snip>

<snip>

<snip>

The discussion was about the Nov 10 conversation, how it was dealt with in court and the ramifications of this.

You appear to be stuck on an earlier 'talking point' - 12 cops, all nighters, missing tapes (or has that been upgraded to videos) etc.
I take it you are by now aware waterboarding, 43 hours, Cheka tactics etc have been dropped from this list.

This is not Watergate or a movie
You might need to do some further research regarding admissibility, the various interrogations, statements, gifts, appearances before judges (silent and terminated), and 'whose' lawyers were fighting to keep 'what' out of the trial.

Once you can make sense of this it should all become clearer.

.