Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Chris C]

________________

Kevin,

Permit me to clarify my point. I'm not suggesting that Raffaele's spit got on Meredith's fingers, and then her bra. On the contrary. Here's the broad question raised by Halides, that I'm answering:
___________________________________________
Halides: If the unknown alleles arrived on the clasp innocently, how can anyone be certain that Raffaele's did not? That is the key question, and I have been waiting for the pro-guilt commenters to supply an answer for about a year now. ---
___________________________________________

The cottage girls shared joints for---what?---seven weeks before Meredith's murder. So this is a plausible method of innocent DNA transfer to the bra clasp, via spit, and suggested to me by Diastole. Whereas Raffaele is not known to have ever shared a joint with Meredith. So the spit theory explains the unknown alleles but won't explain Raffaele's alleles. Q.E.D.

///

So she never washed the bra?

 

[Chris C]

If this is the case, then it would back up his story about Knox being out from 9:00 until 1:00. He had excused his previous story thus:

"In my previous statement I told a load of rubbish because Amanda had convinced me of her version of the facts and I didn’t think about the inconsistencies."

He has never changed this story.

Yep, and Curatolo sees dead people and imaginary buses and Nara can hear into the past. Prosecution super witnesses.

 

[katy_did]

It wasn't adequately equipped in 2007, as far as I know. And I believe that the procedures that should be adhered to for LCN-range analysis include additional sterilisation precautions for equipment and clothing, clean air handling (including positive-pressure ventilation in the testing area), and at least two (and preferably three) separate amplification/test/interpret runs (in order to properly corroborate the result). I don't believe that Stefanoni followed any of these additional procedures.

As I understand it, it also wasn't standard LCN testing that was used, so in that sense Stefanoni obviously didn't follow standard procedure. I posted these quotes from PMF (believe it or not...) some time back.

Dr. Stefanoni and her DNA technicians did not use the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) protocol that many people refer to as low copy number (LCN) analysis. They developed a somewhat unique protocol, one aspect of which employed even more DNA replication cycles than LCN analysis, resulting in greater amplification and, unfortunately, inducing greater artifacts. In my opinion, the Kercher DNA results on the blade should never had been allowed in court, and actually weakened the entire case, because it opened the door for a possibly successful appeal.[...]

You can't wear the distinguished mantle of scientific evidence unless you use an approved method and reproduce the results. Presenting evidence in court is not the same as presenting a research project. One commentator on this forum compared the MK DNA results on the blade to a photograph, but a photograph cannot carry the mantle of scientific results because it can be easily manipulated, as poor Megan Fox will attest to, having her head stapled on bodies in photos all over the internet.

My company makes PCR kits for scientists. We don't guarantee the results unless you follow the protocol. We follow ISO, an international system of quality. Every time you change anything you have to document it and then validate it versus the old method. It is a way of thinking that ensures the highest level of quality control. In this case, Dr. Stefanoni needed to validate her new PCR protocol before being able to use it in court as scientific evidence to convict AK47.

And also this:

You can't use a research project to help convict someone of murder. If Dr. Stefanoni had come into the courtroom with a stack of data and graphs showing that her new PCR protocol worked with other samples compared to control PCR protocols and didn't give non-specific results, I would stand down. The fact that the results couldn't be reproduced is also a major sticking point. Every new form of scientific evidence has its first birthday in a courtroom if it can be shown to be valid. But in this case, what I perceive from a continent away is that Dr. Stefanoni pulled out all stops to get results. She knew Ak47 was guilty. That worries me as a scientist. What would worry me more is if AK47 is able to mastermind a successful appeal out of this PCR protocol controversy, which is why I suggested that this particular piece of evidence should have been dropped.

It's from a poster called Greggy, who obviously otherwise believes Knox to be guilty (hence the cute little nickname for her). AFAIK, no scientist who's spoken out about the case has endorsed what Stefanoni did, apart from her boss...

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Do we know of any unknown profiles which, if they turned out to belong to Filomena, would be significant? She clearly wasn't there during the murder after all.

There were some faint peaks, but nothing that could be fairly regarded as the profile of an unknown subject. It seems they found Meredith's DNA in two spots on Filomena's floor, and Amanda's DNA was in one of those samples.

Amanda's profile was also visible in the other sample, but the peaks were below the threshold used in all the DNA tests except that for the knife blade.

Here are the relevant e-grams:

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/kercher_profile.gif
http://www.friendsofamanda.org/knox_profile.gif
http://www.friendsofamanda.org/rep_176_luminol_stain_filomena_room.gif
http://www.friendsofamanda.org/rep_176_luminol_stain_filomena_room_color.gif
http://www.friendsofamanda.org/rep_177_luminol_stain_filomena_room.gif
http://www.friendsofamanda.org/rep_177_luminol_stain_filomena_room_color.gif

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

They use disposable gloves, too, you know.

I wonder if they used them as thoroughly at the lab as they did at the crime scene?

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/kitchen_dec_18_07_closeup_of_gloves.jpg

 

[Antony]

Perhaps an informal poll? I could be completely mistaken.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_383964d1146d9a1657.jpg[/qimg]

Anyone who has the slightest awareness of body language can see what is happening: Amanda is being positioned for the photo at the choice of the policewoman holding her arms from behind, not her own choice. You can see the policewoman's right hand in particular gripping Amanda's arm quite forcefully. If you did this to someone in other circumstances it would constitute physical assault.

This isolated picture doesn't say anything about guilt or innocence, and is no more than a trivial illustration of power and powerlessness; but the responses here from Draca and Bucketoftea are almost more revealing than the photo itself. They will believe anything they choose to about police behaviour in this case.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Here is some information on the operation of Meredith’s Sony Ericsson cell phone, model k700i. The phone is a candy bar style which means it does not flip open or have a slide mechanism. The on/off button is on the top of the phone. Below is a photo of the front face of the phone.

[qimg]http://z.about.com/d/cellphones/1/0/X/Z/sony-ericsson-k700i-g.jpg[/qimg]

According to the Massei report, after 21:00 on the night of the murder there were four interactions with the phone. (Page 328, English translation) the first three occurred in or around the cottage. The fourth occurred away from the cottage.

1. 21:58 - Attempt to call the phone’s voicemail. The procedure to access voicemail is to press and hold the #1 key. To disconnect from voicemail, press and hold the return key which will place you back to standby mode.
2. 22:00 – Outgoing call to Abbey Bank. There are three possible ways to make this call: (i) input the number using the numeric keypad. (ii) Select this contact from the list of contacts in the phonebook. This process is done in this manner: (a) Press the navigation key to go to the desktop; (b) Use navigation key to highlight the phonebook; (c) Press navigation key to select highlighted phonebook. (d) Use the navigation key to select contact (if Abbey Bank is first contact that entry will be already selected); (d) press selection key to initiate call. (iii) Use speed dial. If speed dial has been set up, each contact in the phonebook that has been designated for speed dial is assigned a number. If Abbey Bank was designated for speed dial, it would be given #1 (being first on the list). The process for calling the number using speed dial would be to press #1, then press the selection key.
3. 22:13 – Incoming call from internet. The call is rejected. A call can be rejected either by pressing the volume button (on the side of the phone) twice or by using the navigation key to select “No” on the viewing screen and then pressing the selection key.
4. 00:12 – WIND network pings the cell phone which is no longer in the area of the cottage.

If the phone is not in use for a period of time it automatically goes to sleep mode (all lights turn off). To get the phone back to standby mode press the navigation key.

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.

Thanks for posting this. It's very useful.

 

[bucketoftea]

I wonder if they used them as thoroughly at the lab as they did at the crime scene?

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/kitchen_dec_18_07_closeup_of_gloves.jpg

Your picture proves nothing. I see discarded gloves that appear soiled.. So what.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Anyone who has the slightest awareness of body language can see what is happening: Amanda is being positioned for the photo at the choice of the policewoman holding her arms from behind, not her own choice. You can see the policewoman's right hand in particular gripping Amanda's arm quite forcefully. If you did this to someone in other circumstances it would constitute physical assault.

This isolated picture doesn't say anything about guilt or innocence, and is no more than a trivial illustration of power and powerlessness; but the responses here from Draca and Bucketoftea are almost more revealing than the photo itself. They will believe anything they choose to about police behaviour in this case.

Draca is on our side.

It's a disturbing picture, but mostly because of the expression on Amanda's face. She realizes she is in the grip of a system that does not care about the truth.

 

[LondonJohn]

Draca is on our side.

It's a disturbing picture, but mostly because of the expression on Amanda's face. She realizes she is in the grip of a system that does not care about the truth.

Of course this is really not important in the bigger picture, but this video might show what happened:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/8211531/Amanda-Knox-back-in-court.html

It looks like Knox was paused momentarily by the guard - and it's inconclusive to me whether this was in order to make the right turn, or to provide the photographers with a picture. Certainly a rash of flash bulbs goes off the moment Knox comes to a halt, which kind of suggests the latter. But anyhow.......

 

[RoseMontague]

Of course this is really not important in the bigger picture, but this video might show what happened:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/8211531/Amanda-Knox-back-in-court.html

It looks like Knox was paused momentarily by the guard - and it's inconclusive to me whether this was in order to make the right turn, or to provide the photographers with a picture. Certainly a rash of flash bulbs goes off the moment Knox comes to a halt, which kind of suggests the latter. But anyhow.......

The choice of a photograph when several exist is in many cases an editorial decision. Which picture conveys the message you are presenting the best. In the case of this article which is pro guilt it would seem they chose a picture that made Amanda look less than appealing.

 

[LondonJohn]

As I understand it, it also wasn't standard LCN testing that was used, so in that sense Stefanoni obviously didn't follow standard procedure. I posted these quotes from PMF (believe it or not...) some time back.


And also this:

It's from a poster called Greggy, who obviously otherwise believes Knox to be guilty (hence the cute little nickname for her). AFAIK, no scientist who's spoken out about the case has endorsed what Stefanoni did, apart from her boss...

Yes - it's obvious to anyone who actually understands the science in any sort of objective manner that the knife will be thrown out on appeal. It's also obvious that the fact that it was accepted in the first trial is a serious indictment of Massei's court's logic and reasoning (together with possibly a failing on behalf of the defence in not attacking the knife evidence convincingly enough). Of course, it's also a searing indictment not only of Stefanoni, but also of Stefanoni's "independent"(!!) boss, Biondo, who confidently asserted that everything was done properly. I'd now be interested to see what Greggy has to say on the way the bra clasp was handled, tested and interpreted. Because I don't think that will make stellar reading for those convinced of Sollecito's guilt, either.

PS I see that the latest groupthink buzz-phrases are "emotional intelligence (lack of)" and "endless repetition". The psychology of mantras is very interesting

 

[LondonJohn]

The choice of a photograph when several exist is in many cases an editorial decision. Which picture conveys the message you are presenting the best. In the case of this article which is pro guilt it would seem they chose a picture that made Amanda look less than appealing.

Absolutely. Camilla Parker-Bowles would attest to this practice

 

[quadraginta]

Of course this is really not important in the bigger picture, but this video might show what happened:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/8211531/Amanda-Knox-back-in-court.html

It looks like Knox was paused momentarily by the guard - and it's inconclusive to me whether this was in order to make the right turn, or to provide the photographers with a picture. Certainly a rash of flash bulbs goes off the moment Knox comes to a halt, which kind of suggests the latter. But anyhow.......

It suggests to me that paparazzi style photographers take their pictures at the most opportune moments, which at the best of times are rarely the most flattering ones. I doubt that their ensuing selection process improves matters much, either.

This is why the simple act of getting out of an automobile can lead to the entire world learning that Britney Spears makes the same underwear choices as the archetypical Scotsman in a kilt.

Of course some may choose to believe that it was the deliberate, underhanded action of the conniving Italian guards, probably in league with fiendishly clever prosecutors. But anyhow ...

 

[RoseMontague]

Absolutely.

PMF describes this picture as cunning and manipulative. I would describe it as courageous. How do you feel about this one?

 

[bucketoftea]

PMF describes this picture as cunning and manipulative. I would describe it as courageous. How do you feel about this one?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_383964d11dd61a21ee.jpg[/qimg]

I don't find it cunning and manipulative. It's an unfortunately unflattering picture, but what I think is going on is that she is mirroring the fellow whose face we can't see. This is normal body language to mirror the person you're engaged with. I don't see anything sinister, but not sure I see courage.

 

[RoseMontague]

I don't find it cunning and manipulative. It's an unfortunately unflattering picture, but what I think is going on is that she is mirroring the fellow whose face we can't see. This is normal body language to mirror the person you're engaged with. I don't see anything sinister, but not sure I see courage.

I appreciate your opinion. I will readily admit that my perception of a picture is probably influenced by my perception of the person in the picture, and that those opinions will probably diverge from those at PMF on the same photo.

The message of the pictures the defense has on the screen at the courtroom shots at the link to follow is one that speaks to the police handling of the evidence in this case, if I am not mistaken:

http://www.daylife.com/search/photos/7/grid?q=Amanda+Knox

 

[RoseMontague]

Is the lab in Rome equipped to do LCN testing/analysis? Do you know what procedures and protocols Stefanoni did not adhere to specifically?

Here is an example of setting up protocols and procedures for this type of testing:

The bogey is contamination. The very sensitivity of the technique which enables it to extract a DNA profile from the tiniest sample also makes it extremely vulnerable to contamination. Stringent measures are needed to minimise that risk.

The ESR has spent $1 million building special anti-contamination areas at its premises in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch. Protocols are being developed for crime scenes where the LCN technique is used and for the handling of samples from collection through to courtroom.

LCN crime scenes will be divided into cold, warm and hot zones hot being the crime zone. Clothes are put on and discarded at each zone to minimise the risk of contamination.

We live in a "soup" of DNA, explains ESR forensic programme manager Keith Bedford. "If I were to shed dandruff, massive amounts of dna could fall ... hair could carry DNA. The way I am speaking at the moment, we could probably detect DNA on this pad in front of me."

"LCN is not just about turning up the dial in the DNA lab, or about a tweak to the DNA system," says Bedford, "it is a reworking of the the whole process."

Scene examiners and sample analysts gown up like surgeons, dressing down from hairnet to booties to avoid, for example, a dislodged hair falling on to the gown.

Consumables, such as the water used to dampen swabs, must be DNA free.

Back at the laboratory, there are a range of measures from sticky mats to remove material from footwear to special fluids and ultra-violet light for cleaning the sparse examination area which has separate air conditioning to avoid contamination from air elsewhere in the building.

At the ESR's Auckland premises, entry to the LCN examination area is restricted to three specialist analysts and an equipment calibration technician. It includes a dressing lobby and a sampling room with a "biological safety cabinet" in which the sample is placed inside a tube that in turn is certified by its manufacturers to be free of DNA.

The tube containing the sample is taken to the next sealed area where chemicals are added as part of the process of extracting a DNA reading.

As an aid to accounting for extraneous DNA, people who come into contact with the scene or sample through their work (scientists, police, emergency service staff, pathologists) will have their DNA stored on a special register.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10408000

 

[colonelhall]

If this is the case, then it would back up his story about Knox being out from 9:00 until 1:00. He had excused his previous story thus:

"In my previous statement I told a load of rubbish because Amanda had convinced me of her version of the facts and I didn’t think about the inconsistencies."

He has never changed this story.

ChrisC replies: "Yep, and Curatolo sees dead people and imaginary buses and Nara can hear into the past. Prosecution super witnesses."

I don't understand what you are implying.

Is it not true that Solecito has not given Knox an alibi?

 

[colonelhall]

Chris C perhaps you implying that Solecito is as nutty as you believe Curatolo to be.