• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
katy_did said:
I'm guessing that Alessi/Aviello will be allowed to testify if the defence want them to since the prosecution didn't offer any objection, and the judge said that the documents from Rudy's appeals/trial can be admitted. The 90 days extension was granted as well.

I'm not sure about the rest - he definitely granted an independent review of the knife/bra clasp, but I don't know about anything else, the audiometric testing and so on. Not sure either about the distinction between new testing/review of those two pieces of evidence (perhaps it would depend on whether or not new tests can be carried out? Obviously that's not the case with the knife, apart from maybe removing the handle etc).
Click to expand...

New tests could be carried out on the bra clasp as Stefanoni said there was more DNA. The knife could not have new tests (possibly apart from what you write) but the procedure of testing and the results could be studied I guess.

Nick Pisa is reporting that apparently Hellman is allowing Curatolo to be requestioned.
 
quadraginta said:
Are you suggesting that Fulcanelli's question was prompted by some other consideration than the relevance to Curatolo's testimony?
Click to expand...


I think I can suggest that. It seems to have started with SomeAlbi reacting to katy_did off-handedly calling Curatolo "Toto." SomeAlibi wrote:

"His name is Mr Curatolo which you can do him the dignity of using rather than Toto. Homeless people are first and foremost people and they have enough on their plate without you belittling them."

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6668841&postcount=21195

Withnail responded to that with, "It's well-known in Perugia that Curatolo has mental problems..." He didn't attach that to the credibility of Curatolo's testimony.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6668859&postcount=21196

Then Fulcanelli asked Withnail to support his claim, and I offered my take on it. I'm not sure in any of those four or five posts you can find anybody saying Curatolo's testimony was not credible because he's "tetched."
 
christianahannah said:
New tests could be carried out on the bra clasp as Stefanoni said there was more DNA. The knife could not have new tests (possibly apart from what you write) but the procedure of testing and the results could be studied I guess.

Nick Pisa is reporting that apparently Hellman is allowing Curatolo to be requestioned.
Click to expand...

Ah OK, thanks; yeah it sounds as if new tests could potentially be carried out on the bra clasp at least. What the judge has actually agreed to (review/testing) still seems a bit vague at the moment.

Significant news about Curatolo being requestioned...
 
katy_did said:
Ah OK, thanks; yeah it sounds as if new tests could potentially be carried out on the bra clasp at least. What the judge has actually agreed to (review/testing) still seems a bit vague at the moment.

Significant news about Curatolo being requestioned...
Click to expand...

This article gives a bit more information about what was granted today (of course, this information could change as more information becomes available):

The court selected two experts from Rome's Sapienza University to review the evidence. The experts will be formally given the task at the trial's next session on Jan. 15.
Click to expand...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013710780_apeuitalyknox7thldwritethru.html
 
christianahannah said:
This article gives a bit more information about what was granted today (of course, this information could change as more information becomes available):

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013710780_apeuitalyknox7thldwritethru.html
Click to expand...

A bit more from this AGI article:

Secondo quanto disposto dalla Corte la perizia dovra' essere svolta se possibile dirattamente attraverso l'esame dei reperti o, in subordine, valutando il grado di attendibilita' degli accertamenti genetici eseguiti dalla polizia scientifica, con eventuali riferimenti anche in relazione alla contaminazione. I periti nominati dalla Corte saranno Stefano Conti e Carla Vecchiotti dell'Universita' La Sapienza di Roma.

According to what was decided by the Court, the expert review should if possible be carried out through direct examination of the exhibits or, as a lesser alternative, by evaluating the degree of reliability of the genetic investigations performed by the scientific police, with possible reference also to contamination. The experts nominated by the Court will be Stefano Conti and Carlo Vecchiotti of the Universita’ La Sapienza di Roma.
Click to expand...

So that sounds like further testing (or at least direct examination) of the exhibits if possible, but if not a review of testing that was carried out?
 
katy_did said:
A bit more from this AGI article:



So that sounds like further testing (or at least direct examination) of the exhibits if possible, but if not a review of testing that was carried out?
Click to expand...

I don't think a re-testing (I could be wrong) but an examination of the results (charts, profiles), lab procedures, collection procedures, etc.

I am sure more will be added as time proceeds such as a checklist of what was granted from the appeal documents and what was rejected.

Umbria24 has a bit more information along with photos and video from today.

http://www.umbria24.it/cronaca/mez-...elesi-a-nuove-perizie-su-coltello-e-gancetto/
 
colonelhall said:
Just to clarify things. [...]

I also find it interesting that so many poster appear to have disowned Mr. Moore. Especially as he appears to be wheeled out to support any unchallenged claims made by the Knox family.

[...]

I would merely point to the numerous statements that have been made by many journalists over the past year.
Click to expand...

Attacks against Mr. Steve Moore change nothing execpt to lower the esteem of the person making those attacks.

I will give you links to what Mr. Steve Moore writes. If you find facts from Massei or the court transcripts that refute his facts, then I will change my mind about the interrogation.

Right now, I believe that the CIA document on brainwashing provided by Moore best describes the techniques used against Amanda.
 
colonelhall said:
Just to clarify things.
[...]
I also find it interesting that so many poster appear to have disowned Mr. Moore. Especially as he appears to be wheeled out to support any unchallenged claims made by the Knox family.

Inn answer to Halides question "Do you claim that Steve Moore maintains it was waterboarding and that it was for fourteen hours? If so, could you cite something?"

I would merely point to the numerous statements that have been made by many journalists over the past year.
Click to expand...

The interrogation --> http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI7.html
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI3.html

This is the first time I find myself entirely on the side of an officer of the law. FBI agents are, however, very well educated and trained.


http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI2.html
http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/FBI6.html

The interrogation is the report you take issue with. The central thesis of that report was that brainwashing techniques, as provided in the CIA memorandum extracts included, were used.

The issue is: Were brainwashing techniques used against Amanda? I believe they were. That is my conclusion as well as the conclusion of Mr. Moore. The duration of the last interrogation is not the only issue or even the fundamental issue.
 
Last edited:
tsig said:
Nice goalpost move there.
Click to expand...

Thank you! You've got to remember that I am a loose cannon. I wasn't part of the duration argument. I am the part of the argument that the interrogation used many methods of the CIA described brainwashing techniques.

We are different people.
 
Last edited:
Has anyone got any information on wheather or not the pillowcase stains will be tested. From the link that you provided christianahannah it appears that the judge has extended the time Amanda and Raffaele can be held without a verdict
 
christianahannah said:
I don't think a re-testing (I could be wrong) but an examination of the results (charts, profiles), lab procedures, collection procedures, etc.

I am sure more will be added as time proceeds such as a checklist of what was granted from the appeal documents and what was rejected.

Umbria24 has a bit more information along with photos and video from today.

http://www.umbria24.it/cronaca/mez-...elesi-a-nuove-perizie-su-coltello-e-gancetto/
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I'm not sure. That quote from AGI definitely seems to suggest either they examine the exhibits directly ("reperti", I think, is usually the word used for the exhibits themselves), or that they look at the scientific police's investigation, although I can see your point in that theoretically they could look at the raw data without making any judgment on the scientific police's interpretation of it. The Umbria article is a bit more ambiguous than the AGI one:

I periti – ha spiegato la corte – dovranno esaminare le tracce di dna trovate sui reperti ed attribuire il codice genetico. Se questo non fosse possibile gli esperti dovranno valutare gli esami già agli atti.

The experts - explained the Court - should examine the DNA traces found on the exhibits and assign a genetic code. If this isn't possible, the experts must evaluate the investigations already in the trial records.
Click to expand...

So here it's the DNA traces that are mentioned rather than the exhibits themselves. Although, why wouldn't it be possible for them to look at the raw data from the Scientific Police? I'm inclined to think he's saying they should do their own tests if they can, but you could be right that it's just the raw results they're being asked to look at; I guess we'll find out for sure before too long!
 
Last edited:
billyryan said:
Has anyone got any information on wheather or not the pillowcase stains will be tested. From the link that you provided christianahannah it appears that the judge has extended the time Amanda and Raffaele can be held without a verdict
Click to expand...

I haven't read anything either way about the pillowcase stains. I think the extension was 90 days.
 
katy_did said:
Hmmm, I'm not sure. That quote from AGI definitely seems to suggest either they examine the exhibits directly ("reperti", I think, is usually the word used for the exhibits themselves), or that they look at the scientific police's investigation, although I can see your point in that theoretically they could look at the raw data without making any judgment on the scientific police's interpretation of it. The Umbria article is a bit more ambiguous than the AGI one:



So here it's the DNA traces that are mentioned rather than the exhibits themselves. Although, why wouldn't it be possible for them to look at the raw data from the Scientific Police? I'm inclined to think he's saying they should do their own tests if they can, but you could be right that it's just the raw results they're being asked to look at; I guess we'll find out for sure before too long!
Click to expand...

You could be correct. Quite a few of the articles are ambiguous.

It could be run tests on the bra clasp (there is more DNA which can be tested according to Stefanoni); look at raw data on knife (which has no extracted DNA to be tested)?

My science background is sorely lacking but can you re-swab the knife and bra clasp (and get uncontaminated results)? I would think not, but I am not sure.

Won't there be a report from the judge on what exactly was granted (and not) by him?
 
Francesco Bruno is professor of criminology and forensic psychopathology at Rome's La Sapienza University.
The same gentleman who is convinced of the defendants' innocence.
The same university of the 2 experts selected by the court today to review the forensic evidence.
 
Last edited:
I for one am glad the evidence will be reviewed by professionals and not internet amatuers. Maybe some topics might actually get cleared up now. Heres to hoping.

lxxx
 
katy_did said:
Sounds like the judge has agreed to an independent review of the forensic evidence.
Click to expand...

Great news!

In an unusual move, the Perugia court said on Saturday it would hear new witnesses and also new expert evidence concerning the knife allegedly used as the murder weapon.

"After three years we've had our first big victory," said Sollecito's lawyer Luca Maori. Knox and Sollecito broke down in tears when the decision was announced.
The court said it would hear an American scientist for the defense, who will produce evidence aiming to show quantities of DNA found on the knife are too small to be reliable.
Click to expand...

Wonderful!
Is this the turning point - like the battle of Midway in WWII?

After all the torpedo bombers had been shot down and the second wave had also missed, the third wave of dive bombers hit and sunk four of the Jap carriers. It was the decisive turning point in the war as the Japanese never experienced major victory again.
 
Last edited:
katy_did said:
Hmmm, I'm not sure. That quote from AGI definitely seems to suggest either they examine the exhibits directly ("reperti", I think, is usually the word used for the exhibits themselves), or that they look at the scientific police's investigation, although I can see your point in that theoretically they could look at the raw data without making any judgment on the scientific police's interpretation of it. The Umbria article is a bit more ambiguous than the AGI one:



So here it's the DNA traces that are mentioned rather than the exhibits themselves. Although, why wouldn't it be possible for them to look at the raw data from the Scientific Police? I'm inclined to think he's saying they should do their own tests if they can, but you could be right that it's just the raw results they're being asked to look at; I guess we'll find out for sure before too long!
Click to expand...

An article from Nadeau which explains in English the judge's decision which confirms what you state:

“If possible, the tests must be redone,” Judge Claudio Pratillo Helmen told the court. “If they can’t be re-tested, then the procedures must be closely examined.”
Click to expand...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-...-evidence-will-be-retested/?cid=hp:mainpromo1
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom