Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris C]

Wherever do you get your scientific facts from?
Do you just pull them out of your head?

How about THE FACT that some of the alleles the lab credited to Sollecito's profile doesn't belong to Sollecito.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Yes - wasn't the knife removed from the original container in which it had been placed, in a non-sterile environment? (And wasn't this original container, in any case, not a proper evidence bag, but rather some sort of box from Sollecito's apartment itself?!)

This totally violates chain-of-custody rules, as far as I'm aware. If the police were going to Sollecito's apartment to look for forensic evidence (among other reasons), then it's abundantly clear that they should have taken a number of sterile evidence collection bags of varying sizes with them. What would they have done, for example, if they'd found a blood-stained jacket in Sollecito's wardrobe? What "suitable receptacle" would they have places such a large item in, in order to remove it from the apartment?

The "crack" forensics team quite clearly erred badly again in this instance. The knife should have been placed in a sterile evidence bad in situ at Sollecito's apartment, and this bag should not have been opened until the knife was in the lab and about to be tested. There's no excuse whatsoever for this not to have been the case.

They should have handled it differently, but it probably wouldn't have made any difference in this particular case, because the most likely source of Meredith's DNA was a tweezer, pipette, or some other instrument in the lab. I have posted photos and video that show how Stefanoni mis-handled evidence at the crime scene... she dropped a swab from a tweezer, picked it off the floor, and resumed scrubbing as if nothing had happened. She handled evidence swabs like cleaning rags, covering a wide area and bearing down on them with her thumb in a way that was all but certain to spread material from one sample to the next. Did her techniques magically improve once she got to the lab? I doubt it.

 

[LondonJohn]

They should have handled it differently, but it probably wouldn't have made any difference in this particular case, because the most likely source of Meredith's DNA was a tweezer, pipette, or some other instrument in the lab. I have posted photos and video that show how Stefanoni mis-handled evidence at the crime scene... she dropped a swab from a tweezer, picked it off the floor, and resumed scrubbing as if nothing had happened. She handled evidence swabs like cleaning rags, covering a wide area and bearing down on them with her thumb in a way that was all but certain to spread material from one sample to the next. Did her techniques magically improve once she got to the lab? I doubt it.

I totally agree. It's just another illustration of the way that proper procedures and protocols weren't followed by these allegedly world-class forensics officers, but as you say it probably didn't have an effect upon the knife (unless, of course, its unbagging in the police station was for something more sinister....). The "mopping up" and ham-fisted swabbing techniques exposed on the video are an embarrassment to the profession of crime scene analysis, and in and of themselves they yank the door wide open for misleading test results.

Incidentally, it would also appear to be highly irregular for the DNA tester to be the same person who actually leads the collection exercise. I'm pretty confident that this is as irregular in Italy as it would be in the UK or US - where scene of crime officers specialise in evidence identification and collection, and DNA testers sit in laboratories and specialise in testing/interpreting the evidence that is supplied to them. Why was Stefanoni even at the cottage in the first place?

 

[Katody Matrass]

I don't see that it being the day before overwhelms the time they spent in the apartment preceding that.

But we must accept his DNA was in the cottage.

True. As were the police, and Filomina's boyfriend I think. In any case, he never entered Meredith's room.

We cannot assume his DNA wouldn't get there anyway.
Given the number of people going in and out of that room, not changing protective shoe covers or simply without any protective gear, and the disarrange they created in the whole house it is certain they contaminated the room.

In teeny, tiny quantities though. She would have been transferring hugely greater quantities of her own DNA.

His DNA trace was a tiny quantity.

I don't see how that is significant.

It contributes to the amount of his DNA deposited all over the cottage.

But this is only one piece of evidence. As has been discussed before, you could be 99% sure of guilt, but have relatively low levels of certainty about individual pieces of the evidence, even below 50% certainty.

I don't see any other piece of evidence incriminating with comparable magnitude. Taken that DNA trace away, would you still convict?

Being consistent with something you don't think happened doesn't mean a lot.

I don't see any other forensic evidence incriminating him.
That lack of other traces is meaningful. If we had other traces of him on victim's clothing or body, if there were his bloody footprints or fingerprints we could much more safely conclude that the bra hook trace had been deposited during the crime.
Conversely, lack of other traces contributes to the conclusion that the bra hook trace has no connection to the crime.

That's only one way the DNA could have gotten there with Raffaele still being involved in the murder. The bra clasp was removed at some point after all.

Please clarify.

Depends what he did, doesn't it? Rudy supposedly did a heck of a lot, and sure there was DNA and fingerprints, but it's not like they were gathering them up by the bucketful. Raffaele and Amanda, if they were involved, presumably were less physically involved than Rudy.

No. According to the prosecution's theory Rudy and Raffaele held her down, and Amanda and Raffaele stabbed her with knives. It was 4 people struggling in a small room.

I'm not going to touch a discussion about footprints.

Wise move

True, that's a different scenario with other problems. Are we talking about the police, the prosecutor, and the lab working alone, or together to frame them here?

No need to complicate. Single cop who wanted to make sure the obviously guilty daddy's boy doesn't get away with the murder would be enough.

Another thing others mentioned already: Confirmation bias in testing. Nothing was done to mitigate human factor in testing and evaluation of the DNA. To the contrary, it was known to all, that the sole purpose of the additional December search was to pin down Raffaele.

 

[bucketoftea]

I do believe you have that backwards. The knife was originally placed in a sealed evidence bag. Back at the police station, it was removed from the bag and placed in a box that formerly contained a calendar

I'd like to know what you mean by a sterile environment.

 

[Katody Matrass]

What assumption?

The on/off button on my old Sony/Ericsson 810i is also a "small button on top of the phone", and I've had several other phones like that.

TomCH, what is it that you propose as an alternative explanation of Meredith's phone data?

 

[bucketoftea]

They should have handled it differently, but it probably wouldn't have made any difference in this particular case, because the most likely source of Meredith's DNA was a tweezer, pipette, or some other instrument in the lab. I have posted photos and video that show how Stefanoni mis-handled evidence at the crime scene... she dropped a swab from a tweezer, picked it off the floor, and resumed scrubbing as if nothing had happened. She handled evidence swabs like cleaning rags, covering a wide area and bearing down on them with her thumb in a way that was all but certain to spread material from one sample to the next. Did her techniques magically improve once she got to the lab? I doubt it.

Was the knife found to have DNA from Sollecito? No. Any unidentified DNA came from knife? No. Don't think the knife was "contaminated" by the shoebox, then.

I don't see how the bidet collection was inappropriate. Used swabs like cleaning rags? She did it right. What do you think removing material with a swab actually is but cleaning the surface?

No "tweezers" are used in laboratories. They are called *forceps*.

 

[bucketoftea]

In fact, they use disposable pipette tips and disposable forceps. Don't doubt that lab paractices are in place to absolutely minimise/eradicate contamination. Teaching granny to suck eggs much?

 

[LondonJohn]

Was the knife found to have DNA from Sollecito? No. Any unidentified DNA came from knife? No. Don't think the knife was "contaminated" by the shoebox, then.

I don't see how the bidet collection was inappropriate. Used swabs like cleaning rags? She did it right. What do you think removing material with a swab actually is but cleaning the surface?

No "tweezers" are used in laboratories. They are called *forceps*.

You'd better tell these guys that they're getting the names of their own products wrong, then.....

http://www.crime-scene.com/store/A-6955.shtml



Oh,and these guys too:

http://www.coleparmer.co.uk/catalog/product_index.asp?cls=4175

http://www.selectscience.net/products/pipetboy-vacuum-tweezers/?prodID=84768

http://www.csiequipment.com/ProductDetails.aspx?productID=585

 

[bucketoftea]

You'd better tell these guys that they're getting the names of their own products wrong, then.....

http://www.crime-scene.com/store/A-6955.shtml

I beg your pardon. It must be American usage.

 

[bucketoftea]

Let me correct that post:

Was the knife found to have DNA from Sollecito? No. Any unidentified DNA came from knife? No. Don't think the knife was "contaminated" by the shoebox, then.

I don't see how the bidet collection was inappropriate. Used swabs like cleaning rags? She did it right. What do you think removing material with a swab actually is but cleaning the surface?

 

[Chris C]

Was the knife found to have DNA from Sollecito? No. Any unidentified DNA came from knife? No. Don't think the knife was "contaminated" by the shoebox, then.

I don't see how the bidet collection was inappropriate. Used swabs like cleaning rags? She did it right. What do you think removing material with a swab actually is but cleaning the surface?

No "tweezers" are used in laboratories. They are called *forceps*.

They are called forceps in Italian? Then again it depends on what type of tweezers/forceps you purchase on whether or not they are called tweezers or forceps. Then again those tweezers at the knox/kercher home were not used in the lab, they where used outside the lab.

 

[bucketoftea]

They are called forceps in Italian? Then again it depends on what type of tweezers/forceps you purchase on whether or not they are called tweezers or forceps. Then again those tweezers at the knox/kercher home were not used in the lab, they where used outside the lab.

I am speaking from experience. I have never used "tweezers" in the lab, and never, ever heard them called such. :shrugs:

If the alleged contamination did not occur in the shoebox, they use disposable "tweezers" and pipette tips, where do you think it comes from? Anything else holding material to be tested is also disposable.

What does Dan O mean by a "sterile environment"?

 

[bucketoftea]

They are called forceps in Italian? Then again it depends on what type of tweezers/forceps you purchase on whether or not they are called tweezers or forceps. Then again those tweezers at the knox/kercher home were not used in the lab, they where used outside the lab.

They would still not be reused.

 

[nopoirot]

Then you have Filomena's mysteriously closing door. Amanda avers that it was closed when she returned to the cottage Friday morning. In his diary, Raffaele says that, when he and Amanda returned, he saw immediately the door was wide open and the window shattered. He seems to be very aware of the significance of what he is here saying. I see no reason to doubt that he is here repeating what he told the police. If Amanda had seen the broken window, one is at a loss to explain why she did not immediately try to rouse Meredith, discover her door was locked, and sound the alarm, if only by telephoning Raffaele, running into the street, whatever. Any cop worth his pay would have smelled blood at this point.

It has here been proposed that someone entered the locked cottage after Amanda left and closed the door. I don't know that the police would have found that theory persuasive.

 

[nopoirot]

"The whole truth and nothing but the truth": We're in the court of public opinion, not a court of law. In my simplicity, I had supposed that the first priority is to try to puzzle out what really happened here.

 

[Justinian2]

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.

You've got one thing correct. The killing of Meridith was senseless. I saw as show on America's most wanted Sunday night where a black man killed his white girlfriend by stabbing her 15 times while she was trying to escape in her car. He fled the scene and lived in various homeless shelters for months. So the 'well done' goes to the German and Italian police for finding Guede so quickly.

 

[christianahannah]

They should have handled it differently, but it probably wouldn't have made any difference in this particular case, because the most likely source of Meredith's DNA was a tweezer, pipette, or some other instrument in the lab. I have posted photos and video that show how Stefanoni mis-handled evidence at the crime scene... she dropped a swab from a tweezer, picked it off the floor, and resumed scrubbing as if nothing had happened. She handled evidence swabs like cleaning rags, covering a wide area and bearing down on them with her thumb in a way that was all but certain to spread material from one sample to the next. Did her techniques magically improve once she got to the lab? I doubt it.

Charlie how many samples did Stefanoni swab/collect from the crime scene?

According to the motivations it was Brocci who did the evidence swabbing/collection of the small bathroom.

Stefanoni collected the toilet paper from the large bathroom but I am not sure what else she may have collected. She was present on December 18, 2007 but did she do any evidence swabbing/collection at that time?

 

[bucketoftea]

You've got one thing correct. The killing of Meridith was senseless. I saw as show on America's most wanted Sunday night where a black man killed his white girlfriend by stabbing her 15 times while she was trying to escape in her car. He fled the scene and lived in various homeless shelters for months. So the 'well done' goes to the German and Italian police for finding Guede so quickly.

What does the race of these individuals have to do with anything?

 

[bucketoftea]

BTW

If the knife wasn't contaminated by the shoebox, and everything that touches the sample material is disposed of, where exactly do you think any alleged contamination occurred ?

ETA: What does Dan O mean by "sterile environment"?