• 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.
Personally I doubt the TV networks research this stuff particularly carefully. The Daily Mail certainly doesn't.

As for the campaign, again, who knows. With movies being made and book deals there is at least the potential for somebody to make some money. Without going through peoples bin bags for the receipts I don't know how to get to the bottom of it through.

I'm not claiming that their opinions are necessarily well-informed or highly-researched. I'm just suggesting that they may very well have been reached without the intervention of paid PR spin.
 
I'm not claiming that their opinions are necessarily well-informed or highly-researched. I'm just suggesting that they may very well have been reached without the intervention of paid PR spin.
I've spent a lot of time disagreeing with you over the past few days, but I'm content to leave this whole wisdom-of-crowds thing of polls and media opinion as something we basically agree on.
 
Yes, Hellmann wants to put off any testing until those results come back. I think mainly because if the dna is ruled not sollecito's or knox's then he will just throw the case out. I think the further testing is reserved if the lab can't disproved the prosecutions claims on the items, because there would be no need for further testing if there is no murder weapon and/or bra clasp to place knox/sollecito in the room.

My guess as well Chris C,by then I expect Curatola's lies to be shown up for what they are,I presume if the dna is ruled out it will not be possible for the prosecution to do a uturn and request that the pilow case stains be tested.Who knows maybe Raffaele computer use evidence proving he was in his own apartment between 21.26 and 01.00 on the night of November1 2007 will have been presented in court before the dna results from the independent lab.
 
My guess as well Chris C,by then I expect Curatola's lies to be shown up for what they are,I presume if the dna is ruled out it will not be possible for the prosecution to do a uturn and request that the pilow case stains be tested.Who knows maybe Raffaele computer use evidence proving he was in his own apartment between 21.26 and 01.00 on the night of November1 2007 will have been presented in court before the dna results from the independent lab.

I'll give you long odds on that happening.

Its as unlikely as the theory that the major US TV networks take well informed & principled stands on issues.
 
How do you know her DNA isn't mixed with Meredith's? Did they take a DNA sample from Filomena?

Excuse me?

I don't recall that there was an unidentified profile mixed in with AK and the victim's on Filomena's floor. Why would they need to test? I don't know if they have or not. They may have.
 
Excuse me?

I don't recall that there was an unidentified profile mixed in with AK and the victim's on Filomena's floor. Why would they need to test? I don't know if they have or not. They may have.

No, but there was plenty of unidentified profiles mixed with Meredith's dna. I'm not saying Filomena did it. When you dont take control samples from everyone in a home, then you run the risk of missing something. As an example, claiming that sollecito's dna proves he is the killer, when there are 3 unidentified profiles in the same sample. Plus when you add in mixed dna, if you are able to pull a roommates dna profile out of a mixed sample, you can then rule out those alleles as possibly belonging to someone else. In sollecito's profile the court ruled out some of the alleles belonging to him because they didn't even match his profile.
 
I'll give you long odds on that happening.

Its as unlikely as the theory that the major US TV networks take well informed & principled stands on issues.

Raffaele has consistantly said he used his computer that night,the postal police computer tecnician erased all evidence,or so he thought,new evidence is to be presented at the appeal,how can you be so certain that without hearing the evidence that proof of Raffaele computer activity cannot be provided,just by looking at Raffaele body language alone in his last few appearances in public shows he has grown strong in prison and looks like a man who is confident his innocence can be proven
 
Several observations

The process for calling and then disconnecting from voice mail is to press and hold the #1 key then press the return key which is located right above the #1 key.

The process for calling the Abbey bank using speed dial (providing the bank was on the speed dial list) would be to press the #1 key then the selection key which is located above the return key.

The first two calls could have been attempted by pressing three different keys a total of four times, all located in the same proximity of the keypad.

Rejecting the internet call would require the use of the navigation key to select “No” (“Yes” is the default) and then pressing the Selection key. Alternatively, the person would have to know that pressing the volume key twice would reject the call.

I agree with LJ, nice analysis.
I know that Meredith was by all accounts a very together girl, but seriously, who has their bank on speed dial?
I would think it more probable that this number was dialled because it was the first in the phone book; to me that suggests someone opening up the phone book in a hurry and hitting it by mistake.
 
neighborhoods...

I grew up in a neighborhood.
I knew who was datin' who, knew when a gnarly fight went down, which store sold booze to the underage boyz, which bro had da kine buds, who sold LSD, shrooms, and coke. We knew when V13 was fighting Culver City or Santa Monica, gunshots, sirens and helicopters were late night noises. Sometimes people die.

If a neighborhood experiences a tragically brutal, bloody, out of the ordinary murder, such as what happened when Miss Meredith Kercher was stabbed to her death, everyone should have known of it immediately. This wasn't a drug deal gone wrong murder, nor a domestic family dispute, nor a car crash victim.
It was a very brutal, cold blooded murder.

People gather, people talk, asking themselves questions such as "what were you doing last night when it happened, did you see anything, did you hear anything?"
People take precautions, some people, fearfull, even leave town.

A guy who lives on the streets for a decade is a local fixture in his neighborhood.
The residents know he's a bum, however eccentric or harmless.
He knows what goes down in his neighborhood.
He made certain "friends" in higher places who know of his chosen "lifestyle".
He knows what he has to do, the right thing to do, for he has experience, having testified in an earlier murder trail.

The day that Miss Meredith Kercher is found stabbed to her death, the neighborhood is crawling with cops and media.
People are talking, consoling themselves, showing concern for their neighbor and loved ones.

The homeless bum, he who has "friends",
does not approach the police, nor any media present to tell them anything of what he saw the night before starting at 9:27pm.,
even though there might be a financial incentive from the media to do so by telling his story and it might also help his "friends" catch a cold blooded, brutal killer of a young foreign student in a town that derives much income from foreign students.

The homeless bum did not see nor hear anything.
The person who brutally stabbed Miss meredith Kercher to her death was sly, he concealed his identity outside the apartment well.
Raffaelel Solecito and Amanda Knox where not hanging around outside for hours, not even mere minutes on that cold night.
Meredith Kercher did not scream out in a blood curdling voice as she was stabbed to her death.

Antonio Curatolo knows this, for he is a fixture of the neighborhood, and knows everything, even the correct time.
He also knows the witness game, as I surely do too, yet he never came forward to help the police.
He is, I believe, simply a puppet whose strings are pulled by very powerfull "friends", a pawn in a very old chess match...

But I wonder of something though,
did Antonio Curatolo even approach the police that day to ask what had happened?
That would be something, to see a video clip or a photo with him in the background, talkin' with a cop...


Peace,
RWVBWL

PS-I have just read that recent visitor to Perugia, Italy paid Mr. Antonio Curatolo $$$ to take his photograph.
I wonder how much he was paid to tesify against Raffaele Sollecito and Amanda Knox?
Hmmm...
 
Last edited:
glove changing

They use disposable gloves, too, you know.

bucketoftea,

One can see a series of photos from a video of some of the collection at IIP. In this series (I have cited this before but do not have it handy), which covers at least eight minutes and roughly half a dozen evidence samples, one sees the same crease in Dr. Stefanoni's glove. There is also trial testimony where Stefanoni is cross-examined and a bracelet is noticed in the same position outside of one glove over a certain amount of time. That the glove which collected the clasp is dirty is also evident in a photo. Finally, Dr. Stefanoni herself testified in a way that suggested changing gloves often was unnecessary because contamination required liquids or vigorous rubbing (I think it is about p. 202 in Massei, but I may be mistaken). I have often wanted to start a fund to pay for gloves for the forensic police. I wonder whether they take PayPal.
 
No, but there was plenty of unidentified profiles mixed with Meredith's dna.
Which unidentified profile are you thinking of that would be significant if it turned out to be Filomena?

I'm not saying Filomena did it.
Naturally, since she has an alibi.

When you dont take control samples from everyone in a home, then you run the risk of missing something.
Like what? The unidentified DNA on the bra clasp always seems to be assumed to be associated with the housemates. What profile might be from the other housemates and would be significant if it turned out to be them?

As an example, claiming that sollecito's dna proves he is the killer, when there are 3 unidentified profiles in the same sample.
At lower quantities. Whether the absolute quantities and the difference in quantity is significant is something for the experts to argue in court. Assuming that the two very weak profiles look like they might be compatible with them, what would it prove? There seems to be quite a bit of opinion that the Amanda profile is too weak and garbled to be considered a match. Presumably this goes double for the two other claimed profiles.

Plus when you add in mixed dna, if you are able to pull a roommates dna profile out of a mixed sample, you can then rule out those alleles as possibly belonging to someone else. In sollecito's profile the court ruled out some of the alleles belonging to him because they didn't even match his profile.
Is there a reason to suppose this can be done? Halides? I thought the weakest two were very much weaker than Raffaele's supposed profile.
 
just by looking at Raffaele body language alone in his last few appearances in public shows he has grown strong in prison and looks like a man who is confident his innocence can be proven
I thought we weren't allowed to do body language analysis. Is this allowed now?
 
mixed DNA

shuttlt,

I have never assumed that the mixed DNA on the bra clasp is from the other housemates; Fulcanelli did, but there is no evidence, one way or another. BTW, mixed DNA is fairly common. There is mixed DNA of Amanda and Raffaele at his apartment; all it means is that they occupied the same space at not too distant times. If a mixed profile of Filomena and either Amanda or Meredith were observed, it would merely reinforce how much of a fool's errand it is to overinterpret mixed DNA.
 
By the way, did anybody get back to me on where I went wrong on whether Stefanoni could or couldn't have seen the material in the scratch?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6678856&postcount=22089

I read back the past few pages and I couldn't see a response.

I didn't realise I was in a queue. :( I'm still waiting on where anyone proposes the alleged contamination occurred. Not from shoebox, not from disposable *tweezers*, pipettes, gloves, cuvettes etc
 
shuttlt,

I have never assumed that the mixed DNA on the bra clasp is from the other housemates;
I didn't intend to specifically attribute that belief to you. I've seen it frequently expressed and I don't recall seeing much made of other possibilities.

Fulcanelli did, but there is no evidence, one way or another.
Sounds about right. He has opinions on most aspects of the case.

BTW, mixed DNA is fairly common. There is mixed DNA of Amanda and Raffaele at his apartment; all it means is that they occupied the same space at not too distant times.
That is my understanding, but presumably the ratio of the mix is to some degree important.

If a mixed profile of Filomena and either Amanda or Meredith were observed, it would merely reinforce how much of a fool's errand it is to overinterpret mixed DNA.
Again, does this not to some degree depend on the ratio's? A hypothetical blood sample containing equal quantities of Amanda and Meredith, and only a light dusting of Filomina might be significant.
 
I didn't realise I was in a queue. :( I'm still waiting on where anyone proposes the alleged contamination occurred. Not from shoebox, not from disposable *tweezers*, pipettes, gloves, cuvettes etc
I'm not sure this is absolutely essential. I think there have been quite a few cases quoted by Halides where lab contamination has been agreed to have occurred, and yet it hasn't been pinned down to a particular dirty pipette. The trick is proving that it has happened.
 
I didn't realise I was in a queue. :( I'm still waiting on where anyone proposes the alleged contamination occurred. Not from shoebox, not from disposable *tweezers*, pipettes, gloves, cuvettes etc

Doesn't this reverse the burden of proof, though? The question is whether the handling of the knife before testing, and the treatment of it in the lab and the testing procedures which were used were correct. It's up to the scientific police to show that they followed proper procedure in all areas relating to the knife. If they can't, then the possibility of contamination exists, and the knife is an unreliable piece of evidence.

I think the discussion over how exactly the knife may have been contaminated is a red herring.
 
I'm not sure this is absolutely essential. I think there have been quite a few cases quoted by Halides where lab contamination has been agreed to have occurred, and yet it hasn't been pinned down to a particular dirty pipette. The trick is proving that it has happened.

Interesting, what would you accept as a proof?
 
Doesn't this reverse the burden of proof, though? The question is whether the handling of the knife before testing, and the treatment of it in the lab and the testing procedures which were used were correct. It's up to the scientific police to show that they followed proper procedure in all areas relating to the knife.
Presumably this will only be demonstrated (assuming it can be) if it becomes an issue at the appeal.

If they can't, then the possibility of contamination exists, and the knife is an unreliable piece of evidence.
Are we talking in court only here? In the world outside the courtroom, the possibility of contamination surely doesn't mean that the evidence has to be thrown out. We just see it in the light of this alternative explanation. There is always a possibility of contamination after all.
 
Interesting, what would you accept as a proof?
In the case of the knife, an alibi for the murder would probably do it. The cases Halides quotes seem to involve almost a proof by contradiction.

To put it another way, proof would be a proof of any aspect of the case that is incompatible with the DNA evidence and whose falsehood would be more inconceivable than the DNA evidence turning out to be false.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom