Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris_Halkides]

no easy answers with DNA

I don't see that being in or outside the LCN range is the best way of categorizing this. LCN is obviously related to testing techniques. Presumably some judgement can be made, based on the quantity involved, as to the likelihood of it having come from direct contact?

shuttit and bobc,

I am a little pressed for time, but I can answer one or two things. There is no way to determine from the amount of DNA or anything else, when or how (primary transfer, secondary transfer, contamination, etc.) how DNA came to be on a piece of evidence. The fact that alleles attributed to Raffaele and to others are small enough to be in the low template range means that the sample should be retested on the basis of alleles possibly dropping in or out, before conclusions are drawn. It also should be tested in a lab that is specially equipped for this kind of work. The fact that this is a mixture raises additional complications (see my comment earlier today). The largest peak of the unattributed alleles is probably larger than the smallest peak of the alleles attributed to Sollecito.

Any knife would be compatible with one of the three wounds. The kitchen knife is too big to have made one or both (depending on one's point of view) of the two other major wounds. It does not match the bloody outline of a knife on the sheets.

 

[Chris C]

Greetings all. I wonder if sufficient attention has been devoted to Raffaele's betrayal of Amanda. As I follow the timelines, Raffaele and Amanda attend classes on the morning of Nov. 5. That evening, they dine together, and present themselves at the police station somewhere around 10:15. While Raffaele is being questioned, Amanda whiles away the time with exercises. Around 10:30 or so (I don't know that the exact time is here important), Raffaele begins to change his testimony. There is much dispute about the nature of this change. Raffaele's diary is hardly a model of lucidity, but in his entry of Nov. 12 he says ". . . in the first statement I made I said that Amanda had stayed with me all night long . . . (trans. Clander.) This leaves little room for doubt that the "big cabbage" came in the second version. One of the cabbage leafs is the claim that Amanda had induced him to "talk crap," another that Amanda had parted from him that evening to go to Le Chic. Some strained attempts have been made to propose that the "big cabbage" did not catch Amanda from the blind side, but I think them unpersuasive. What prompted Raffaele to throw it? On what theory would he substitute a lie for the truth, or one lie for another? What persuasive evidence militates against the commonsensical inference that, having had a couple of days to study on the dangers of perjury, he decided to "come clean"? It did not take him long to realize, of course, that he had dropped himself into a pot of boiling water, but that is beside the point. Amanda, poleaxed with news of Raffaele's betrayal, was thrown into a state of panic and shock. Like Thurber's squirrel, she darted this way, that, "lost her head" and ran right into the tire. Another cuff on the head might well have induced her to confess to the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. It has been plausibly argued, here and elsewhere, that her first "confession" came as early as 1:45. She made herself "roadkill" with that statement, and from it all else flowed. It may not be admissible, in a court of law, but Amanda could hardly have known that. It did not take her long to realize that, in addition to making a most imprudent accusation against Lumumba, she had implicated herself in one of the most lurid crimes of recent memory. I don't know that we need a theory of coercion to account for her subsequent statements. They are but attempts to mitigate the admission that she had been untruthful twice over. In the vernacular, she was "crawfishing." And now she gives to understand that her troubled psyche is throwing up images that may or may not be grounded in reality--you know, like in one of those Jason Bourne movies. Were I the judge, I would be disinclined to spring the door of her cage unless she comes forward with a reasonably plausible account of the facts.

I'm fairly certain that during the interrogation of Sollecito, the police got him to admit that he couldn't be positive that Knox didn't leave while he was sleeping. Then again, was that interrogation tape of Sollecito ever turned over?

 

[katy_did]

katy_did,

If they ask for the electronic data files, then I will believe that they are serious. Until then, I remain on the fence.

You're probably very wise to remain sceptical, Chris! I meant to post that quote for you yesterday actually, but didn't get around to it. Still, the fact that the judge is talking about international standards has to be a good thing, since the knife testing so obviously doesn't meet those standards. I'm cautiously optimistic.

 

[shuttlt]

Well I don't know, I am not a DNA expert. If germs get spread by contact, why not tiny samples of skin cells...

Sure, but germs multiply. If I've got a single cell on the tip of my finger from someone I shook hands with yesterday, it's surely lost in amongst all the other bits of material I've picked up since then. Even though a particular germ is lost in the background of other bits of muck I pick up, they can replicate and make themselves significant.

that would not necessarily mean that DNA would be spread everywhere, it would still be in discrete clumps. If the swab happens to pick up a clump, bingo, positive test. The very sensitivity of the DNA test is in itself a problem with the test.

Sure, to an extent. You've then got the question of odds though. What are the odds of them finding Meredith's DNA and not the DNA of the cleaner, or Raffaele, or somebody else. This is supposedly a clean sample of Meredith. I just don't like the odds of the journey this contaminant has to make and yet come up clean, assuming it doesn't occur in the lab.

I do know at low levels DNA tests required careful interpretation. If I was on the jury, I would be asking "have the prosecution proved that that DNA could only be there by direct contact, and have the prosecution proved that the knife was used in the murder?"

I disagree that those proofs are necessary. We are back to claiming here that for each bit of evidence to count it has to be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt. The DNA itself, and I guess to some minor extent Raffaele's lie, are the proofs (though clearly allowing reasonable doubt) that the knife was involved in the murder. Similarly no proof is necessary that the DNA could ONLY have gotten there in during the murder.

Did they test for the cleaner, other students?

What DNA sample do you think might relate to the cleaner or other students, or are you arguing that there is somebody walking around Perugia with sufficiently similar DNA to Meredith and that this DNA somehow contaminated the knife?

Were samples found but not presented as not being relevant? The problem is that with two small samples found among hundreds of possible locations where there could be a reasonable explanation, it could be a case of keep testing and eventually they will find something by coincidence.

I don't believe the record shows that this is what occurred. If it turns out that it did, then this changes things considerably. An exhaustive search for DNA where all matches to anybody else was excluded might, eventually, be expected to turn up something associated with Meredith. How long this would take is beyond me though.

If it was found belonging to people with absolutely no other connection with the victim then it would be a lot more damning. The fact that it was found belonging to someone who is a close friend and frequent visitor introduces an element of doubt, IMO.

When this happens the consequences to allude to will certainly follow.

 

[RoseMontague]

Were there actual unidentified profiles or was it perhaps possible partial profiles based on hypothesis by Professor Tagliabracci?

Yes, I think it would be fair to characterize them as unidentified partial profiles. The Machine quotes Nadeau as saying the original defense expert of Raffaele's thought one of those profiles could be Amanda's which is an accurate quote as I have quoted that passage previously myself.

 

[bobc]

My guess is that Rudy broke in through Filomena's window. Started searching around her belongings and his nerves caused him to need a bathroom. Meredith came in while he was on the toilet, locking the door behind her with her keys. He snuck up on her in her bedroom, murdered and sexually assaulted her, cleaned up quickly in the bathroom, went back to her bedroom and took her cell phones, keys, and money and then left out the front door, locking both the bedroom door and front door on his way out.

I find the evidence of multiple attackers too compelling to consider a lone wolf scenario. If Rudy was so nervous he could not contain his bowels, would he have not just fled, rather than incur further risk? He seems to transform from petrified petty criminal to a cool, calm hitman in an instant. And somehow he had the presence of mind to clean up, but not flush the toilet... why would he even bother to clean up.. there is broken glass lying around, yet he takes off his socks and shoes and tramps around in the blood... none of this adds up.

And I just think breaking in via Filomena's window has always been a non-starter. It is insistence on the least plausible explanations that has so far really put me off the arguments presented by the pro-innocent.

 

[Chris C]

I am rushing out the door so only have time for a quick link; more later. Judge Micheli ruled that any of the information Rudy claimed to know firsthand could have come from news reports.

http://www.penale.it/page.asp?mode=1&IDPag=750

Look for references to TV, televisione, televisioni, and stampa (press).

Not all. There is the reference to Filomena's window. The media had reported a different window being broken.

 

[christianahannah]

shuttit and bobc,

I am a little pressed for time, but I can answer one or two things. There is no way to determine from the amount of DNA or anything else, when or how (primary transfer, secondary transfer, contamination, etc.) how DNA came to be on a piece of evidence. The fact that alleles attributed to Raffaele and to others are small enough to be in the low template range means that the sample should be retested on the basis of alleles possibly dropping in or out, before conclusions are drawn. It also should be tested in a lab that is specially equipped for this kind of work. The fact that this is a mixture raises additional complications (see my comment earlier today). The largest peak of the unattributed alleles is probably larger than the smallest peak of the alleles attributed to Sollecito.

Any knife would be compatible with one of the three wounds. The kitchen knife is too big to have made one or both (depending on one's point of view) of the two other major wounds. It does not match the bloody outline of a knife on the sheets.

Was it Professor Tagliabracci who defined the bra clasp results (for Raffaele) to be in the lcn range, however, the court and Stefanoni did not?

 

[capealadin]

I am rushing out the door so only have time for a quick link; more later. Judge Micheli ruled that any of the information Rudy claimed to know firsthand could have come from news reports.

http://www.penale.it/page.asp?mode=1&IDPag=750

Look for references to TV, televisione, televisioni, and stampa (press).

As Rudy was there, I would say he is first hand. Did the news reports show lots of blood in the corridor? Photos of same?

 

[shuttlt]

If lots of samples from his flat were tested in a way the knife was we would get lots of various individuals' DNA. I think it's quite possible we would get also a complete history of DNA samples handled by Stafanoni's lab

This is only your view until there is evidence to support it. Personally I suspect the overwhelming majority of samples would come back either as purely Amanda, purely Raffaele, purely the cleaner, or some mixture of those three with some background noise of other people. What's odd about this sample is that they aren't on it.

Considering that he was no stranger to the girls house and taking into account the mess ILE made there before rediscovering the clasp I wouldn't convict him on such evidence.

Perhaps that is the explanation. I had been under the impression that he hadn't been such a frequent visitor. Perhaps I am mistaken. Still, it seem to me that it is a surprise that it would be his DNA and not any of the other candidates who ended up on the clasp.

 

[christianahannah]

Yes, I think it would be fair to characterize them as unidentified partial profiles. The Machine quotes Nadeau as saying the original defense expert of Raffaele's thought one of those profiles could be Amanda's which is accurate as I have quoted that passage previously myself.

Well, possibly (and I stress possibly) some alleles (I think I have the correct term, not sure) matched Amanda's but surely not enough for a profile. I don't think that reference was in any official document was it?

 

[RoseMontague]

I find the evidence of multiple attackers too compelling to consider a lone wolf scenario. If Rudy was so nervous he could not contain his bowels, would he have not just fled, rather than incur further risk? He seems to transform from petrified petty criminal to a cool, calm hitman in an instant. And somehow he had the presence of mind to clean up, but not flush the toilet... why would he even bother to clean up.. there is broken glass lying around, yet he takes off his socks and shoes and tramps around in the blood... none of this adds up.

And I just think breaking in via Filomena's window has always been a non-starter. It is insistence on the least plausible explanations that has so far really put me off the arguments presented by the pro-innocent.

The sound of the toilet flushing would have alerted Meredith that somebody was there. In addition, the boys downstairs mentioned he did not flush on another occasion so this would not be unusual either way.

 

[shuttlt]

Sure, there was plenty of direct contact with the dirty gloves the lab techs were wearing in the bra clasp collection video, then it was dropped on the floor in direct contact with an area three of them had already stepped on in their little white booties (which were put on in the living room, IIRC, and then of course they walked through the living room and hall picking up who knows whose DNA on the bottom of those booties already). LOL.

The potential for contamination just from that video is enough to cast this evidence in doubt even before you consider how it moved across Meredith's floor in the 44 days it was left there to an area of a pile of junk and clothes by the desk also containing who knows whose DNA.

Sure. It could have happened that way. Again, I'm surprised that it would be Raffaele's DNA that would get transferred in this way rather than somebody else's. Or, if you feel that the supposed Amanda DNA and the still weaker unidentified DNA got transferred in this way as well, that Raffaele's of all peoples would be so much stronger.

 

[capealadin]

As I have also often pointed out. Why would rudy lie about the time he arrived or the time he left.

There is no question. Rudy has lied. However, there is no reason for him to lie about the amount of blood in the bathroom and corridor. He had already mentioned all the blood in the bedroom. Talking about all the blood, in no way exonerates him.

ETA. Unless, you need that to be a lie, as it would most certainly then prove that there was a cleanup, and that would incriminate.......who???

 

[RoseMontague]

Well, possibly (and I stress possibly) some alleles (I think I have the correct term, not sure) matched Amanda's but surely not enough for a profile. I don't think that reference was in any official document was it?

I don't remember offhand, you are usually as good as if not better than me on finding these things. LOL.

 

[odeed]

I noticed slight smearing, possibly because of shuffling. Definitely not because of cleanup. Cleaning wouldn't left a discernible footprint outline, but large "painting" swipes or just a uniformly glowing area. Compare the photos from the "messy" gallery.
Reaction in the corridor looks also very weak, compared to the demo.

BTW It's hard to imagine what exactly was cleaned in the corridor if the cleaning produced no cleaning marks but left unscathed luminol detectable footprints and a path of bloody shoeprints visible with naked eye.

The "messy" gallery is probably not the best comparison* as it does not contain any information of how the luminol areas were made. It does not describe if they are prints at all, they could be from blood drops that were washed, and it does not describe if the spots were fresh and still wet, or if they were dried blood.

I only posted the pic which showed the shoeprint from the bluestar as it showed the same area effect described in the "messy" gallery, as is evident in the footprint picture I originally posted. There is also "2" pattern from the big toe down on the picture which suggests to me an attempt to scrub the print in a zig-zag motion similar to the straight lines in http://www.bluestar-forensic.com/gb/gallery/2005_02/09.html.

*I also note that on the Bluestar gallery the same sink, bath and floor feature in different galleries so these look like promotional photographs for the product.

 

[babycondor]

My guess is that Rudy broke in through Filomena's window. Started searching around her belongings and his nerves caused him to need a bathroom. Meredith came in while he was on the toilet, locking the door behind her with her keys. He snuck up on her in her bedroom, murdered and sexually assaulted her, cleaned up quickly in the bathroom, went back to her bedroom and took her cell phones, keys, and money and then left out the front door, locking both the bedroom door and front door on his way out.

OK except he didn't lock the front door because Amanda says she came home and found it open.

 

[moodstream]

The sound of the toilet flushing would have alerted Meredith that somebody was there. In addition, the boys downstairs mentioned he did not flush on another occasion so this would not be unusual either way.

I am inclined to agree that Guede's intention was not to rape or kill Meredith. Guede's intention was to rob the place for cash. It was Nov 1, rent day, and rents were paid in cash. He was interrupted. My guess is he was on the can at the time. The problem was, he could not get out the front door because the front door locks from the inside with a key. Without the key he was stuck there. The only way out was through Meredith. The result was very tragic.

 

[RoseMontague]

OK except he didn't lock the front door because Amanda says she came home and found it open.

You are right and I was wrong on that one, he unlocked it with the keys to get out but did not lock it back behind him.

 

[capealadin]

I am inclined to agree that Guede's intention was not to rape or kill Meredith. Guede's intention was to rob the place for cash. It was Nov 1, rent day, and rents were paid in cash. He was interrupted. My guess is he was on the can at the time. The problem was, he could not get out the front door because the front door locks from the inside with a key. Without the key he was stuck there. The only way out was through Meredith. The result was very tragic.

WHAT?? He was locked in, so he tried rape, and then he murdered Meredith? Is this Cottage Rage...as in the meaningless Road Rage?