Continuation - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[quadraginta]

Quite an *ahem* impassioned post, quadraginta!

If you prefer, I can substitute the phrase "person close to/known to the victim" for the word "friend" in my original post on the subject. That's fine by me. My argument still stands in its entirety with this replacement. Your decision to home in on the word "friend", and to then attack me for using that word, seems to me to be rather reminiscent of a straw-man argument, coupled with a perceived need to attack me personally. Am I wrong?

Yes.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

how the investigation might have proceeded

To All,

I don't wish to wade too deeply into the issue of whether the flatmates should have been suspected. Ron Hendry wrote an article on how the police might have homed in on Rudi Guede much more quickly than they did.

 

[Justinian2]

Personally, I don't think the bra-sharing explanation has much merit either. On top of everything else, even if Amanda DID borrow Meredith's bra at one point, I'd think it would be very unlikely that Meredith wouldn't have laundered the bra before wearing it again herself.

The theory that the Bra clasp DNA implies that Raffaele held down Meredith is absurd in the extreme. The prosecution theory needs to patch some of the dozen or so holes for the theory to be valid.

That The bra clasp DNA = Raffaele's involvement is one of those theories that requires about twelve suppositions in order for it to be considered evidence and not a joke. The borrowed clothes idea is one of those links that needs to be disproved.

A washing machine didn't remove blood stains from my underwear, so why should we automatically assume that it removed DNA?

I think the most likely source of error was from the forensic mistakes. However all sources of errors are possible and can't be laughed away or merely dismissed.

 

[Justinian2]

Knox's DNA wasn't on the bra, so the sharing of underwear is a non issue in this case.

I wondered that myself. Is that a proven fact, or a mere supposition? Is some DNA (like semen) less easily removed than others?

 

[LondonJohn]

To All,

I don't wish to wade too deeply into the issue of whether the flatmates should have been suspected. Ron Hendry wrote an article on how the police might have homed in on Rudi Guede much more quickly than they did.

Quite. And just to be clear, I think it's entirely proper that the police took a look at Meredith's entire circle of friends and acquaintances, and that they took an especially close look at her housemates. And if they'd found that one of Meredith's housemates was demonstrably jealous of Meredith's new relationship with her Italian boyfriend (especially if that housemate were single and had little success with men herself), or even if they'd perhaps found that one of the housemates had been involved in a heated argument with Meredith - maybe in the course of which Meredith might have inflicted some sort of perceived humiliation upon the housemate - then these would have served as clear pointers towards that particular housemate.

Instead, they found clear evidence of four housemates who got on perfectly fine - with the very limited caveat of the niggling annoyances that are almost always present when four strangers live together in a small house. All four were in seemingly happy and contented (and, by all accounts, sexually-fulfilling) relationships, with no signs or indicators of jealousy or heightened sexual tension.

 

[shuttlt]

Is there any scientific significance about Amanda calling the police? Not that I have seen. I would have called 911 first if I thought medical attention could have saved Meredith. Otherwise I would have called my lawyer. If I was highly hung over, I might have split.

Any significance to the order of the call? Not to my thinking. It doesn't belong in court.

There was a challenge to come up with an Amanda-is-guilty story of the crime. I spent a couple of seconds thinking about it and made one up. It was rejected because it was deemed unlikely that Amanda would behave in that way. I thought you were saying that peoples judgements about what would and would not be unlikely behavior should not form part of the argument. Do you mean that, or not?

Are any of the listed methods of profiling scientifically accurate? Is psychiatry a science? Unfortunately, these arguments are outside of the current discussion.

Sorry, I thought you were asserting that it and Scientology were sciences which were useful.

 

[LondonJohn]

The theory that the Bra clasp DNA implies that Raffaele held down Meredith is absurd in the extreme. The prosecution theory needs to patch some of the dozen or so holes for the theory to be valid.

That The bra clasp DNA = Raffaele's involvement is one of those theories that requires about twelve suppositions in order for it to be considered evidence and not a joke. The borrowed clothes idea is one of those links that needs to be disproved.

A washing machine didn't remove blood stains from my underwear, so why should we automatically assume that it removed DNA?

I think the most likely source of error was from the forensic mistakes. However all sources of errors are possible and can't be laughed away or merely dismissed.

But I think a washing machine cycle would most likely have denatured any DNA present in the blood stain on your underwear. The combination of washing detergent and heat (if it were on a 60 degree* wash or higher) would have seen to that - even if some colour remained.

* = about 140 degrees Farenheit

 

[Justinian2]

There was a challenge to come up with an Amanda-is-guilty story of the crime. I spent a couple of seconds thinking about it and made one up. It was rejected because it was deemed unlikely that Amanda would behave in that way. I thought you were saying that peoples judgements about what would and would not be unlikely behavior should not form part of the argument. Do you mean that, or not?.

Most of the time. I believe that Chaos theory best describes the thinking of the majority.

Sorry, I thought you were asserting that it and Scientology were sciences which were useful.

Let's put it this way: I would rather have a friend that was above anger and antagonism on the Scientology tone scale than a friend that was angry, apathetic or dead. I would also rather have a friend that did not fit the psychiatric critea for being a psychotic or an anti-social as defined in DSM IV.

Yes, there is some science to both. It's the grey areas of both 'sciences' that become murkey and less scientific. That's also true of police profiling and marketing studies.

 

[christianahannah]

But an adult male's finger could not access the metal part of the hooks without also having to press against the material, surely? That's my point, really. And whether we're talking about either a rough undressing in the course of a murder, or some sort of post-murder "staging" of a bra removal to simulate sexual elements (but why....?), I think it's incredibly unlikely that whoever took Meredith's bra off would be delicately and carefully manipulating the clasp. Indeed, the amount of bending of the hook suggests that the bra was manipulated in a rough and aggressive fashion. Which is even more reason why if someone's DNA was found on the tiny metal hook, it should also have been found upon the material near and around the clasp mechanism.

There were six separate swabs taken from the bra (minus the clasp) and only trace B yielded Rudy's Y-chromosome. The bra was in very rough shape, it appeared to have been torn and cut off, yet there was only one area swabbed (out of six) which gave a result (Rudy).

I am not sure how easy it is to transfer DNA onto material, however, from the information above it doesn't appear it was in abundance on the bra.

 

[daydreamer]

Personally, I don't think the bra-sharing explanation has much merit either. On top of everything else, even if Amanda DID borrow Meredith's bra at one point, I'd think it would be very unlikely that Meredith wouldn't have laundered the bra before wearing it again herself.

If AK borrowed MK's bra and wore it, her DNA would be all over it an none was found. So, I don't think it is a reasonable explaination for RS's DNA. I think bra fastener was scaped along the floor sometime after the body was removed, when the investigators were piling things in the corner. If RS unfastened it, his DNA would be found on the eyelet as well. I assume the eyelet was tested for RS's DNA with a negative result.


ETA : Whoops, Charlie C already addressed this, sorry

 

[Justinian2]

But I think a washing machine cycle would most likely have denatured any DNA present in the blood stain on your underwear. The combination of washing detergent and heat (if it were on a 60 degree* wash or higher) would have seen to that - even if some colour remained.

* = about 140 degrees Farenheit

I think it would have been more likely that someone rinsing a knife in hot tap water would have exceeded 140 degrees farenheit than the water in a washing machine. What if the clothes were washed in cold water and hung on a line to dry? My wife hangs her bras around the bathroom to dry.

What is the red that's left behind when bloody cloth is washed in detergent, hot water and chlorox? Seems as if the red blood cells would have exploded.

Could semen in wash water be deposited on another article of clothing?

Perhaps the DNA on the bra would be best found by a vacuum. If there was bra swapping, the rush-to-judgement mentality of the prosecution would have concluded that was proof that Amanda was guilty and not that the bra was swapped, so it's just as well...

 

[LondonJohn]

I think it would have been more likely that someone rinsing a knife in hot tap water would have exceeded 140 degrees farenheit than the water in a washing machine. What if the clothes were washed in cold water and hung on a line to dry? My wife hangs her bras around the bathroom to dry.

What is the red that's left behind when bloody cloth is washed in detergent, hot water and chlorox? Seems as if the red blood cells would have exploded.

Could semen in wash water be deposited on another article of clothing?

Perhaps the DNA on the bra would be best found by a vacuum. If there was bra swapping, the rush-to-judgement mentality of the prosecution would have concluded that was proof that Amanda was guilty and not that the bra was swapped, so it's just as well...

The red colour in blood comes from the haemoglobin molecules in the red blood cells. Heat and detergent would most likely denature the haemoglobin protein chains, but the iron in the haemoglobin would then likely oxidise to a simple or complex form of iron oxide - better known as rust. And this is one of the reasons why old blood or washed blood can appear brown, rather than bright red, in colour: iron oxide is brown, as anyone who's ever owned a very old car will easily testify.....

 

[loverofzion]

When I was fourteen, I tried on my sister's bra. That was the last time I ever did anything like that as I soon discovered that while being a fairly attractive male (when young), I made one ugly female.

In the scientific community, the way that a theory is disproved is to find ONE exception to the theory. Only one is necessary. Then it is up to the supporters of the theory to prove why their theory is still valid.

The prosecution's theory that the LCN DNA on the bra clasp meant that Raffaele participated in the murder is only a THEORY - and not a very good theory at that.

The theory that Guede's bloody palm print at the scene of the murder meant that he was there shortly after the murder, and therefore killed Meredith is very plausible. Guede was asked for an explaination of how his bloody print happened. He then gave the implausible explaination that we've all heard. A bloody print at the murder scene usually, and appropriately, results in a conviction.

However, the Bra String Theory is fraught with holes that need to be explained before anyone should believe it.

I see. Again when it is Rudy's DNA there is never a problem.
However when raf's shows up, it must be contamination or that satanic evil prosecutor and his corrupt police staff.

 

[loverofzion]

I think it would have been more likely that someone rinsing a knife in hot tap water would have exceeded 140 degrees farenheit than the water in a washing machine. What if the clothes were washed in cold water and hung on a line to dry? My wife hangs her bras around the bathroom to dry.

What is the red that's left behind when bloody cloth is washed in detergent, hot water and chlorox? Seems as if the red blood cells would have exploded.

Could semen in wash water be deposited on another article of clothing?

Perhaps the DNA on the bra would be best found by a vacuum. If there was bra swapping, the rush-to-judgement mentality of the prosecution would have concluded that was proof that Amanda was guilty and not that the bra was swapped, so it's just as well...

The trial took place over a period of almost a year.
Before that there were two years of investigations and interrogations and seeking the facts about the evidence.
Why call that a "rush to judgment" on the part of the prosecution?
How many years should they wait with their verdict?

 

[Justinian2]

The red colour in blood comes from the haemoglobin molecules in the red blood cells. Heat and detergent would most likely denature the haemoglobin protein chains, but the iron in the haemoglobin would then likely oxidise to a simple or complex form of iron oxide - better known as rust. And this is one of the reasons why old blood or washed blood can appear brown, rather than bright red, in colour: iron oxide is brown, as anyone whose ever owned a very old car will easily testify.....

Another missing link in the prosecution's case is the lack of clothes worn by Amanda and Raffaele that night that had blood stains.

I like this recent interview with Curt Knox:
http://seattlest.com/2011/01/03/new_day_nw_amanda_knoxs_father_disc.php

 

[loverofzion]

All of the bras I own, the everyday ones and the provocative ones, which fasten in the back, have a part of the two hooks which are not covered by material. This would be the rounded part at the top of the hooks. This part is exposed when both fastened and unfastened.

As to when and how Raffaele's DNA came to be on the hooks, I don't know or why his DNA is not on the material of the bra. The clasp material was swabbed (there were two tiny drops of blood on the material and this was the part swabbed) and the result was only Meredith's profile.

As far as sharing bras and underwear in general with other women, I never have. I'm not saying it has never been done among women but I think if one took a poll (away from this thread and forum) it would probably show that it is not a common practice.

No women of my acquaintance share underwear or bras with housemates; the vast majority say they wouldn't even share with their sister.

As for raf's DNA getting there by drying or foldng clothes, well it's posts like these that make this entire forum look ignorant.

 

[loverofzion]

Another missing link in the prosecution's case is the lack of clothes worn by Amanda and Raffaele that night that had blood stains.

I like this recent interview with Curt Knox:
http://seattlest.com/2011/01/03/new_day_nw_amanda_knoxs_father_disc.php

Maybe they threw out the blood stained clothes they wore that night.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

discussed previously

I see. Again when it is Rudy's DNA there is never a problem.
However when raf's shows up, it must be contamination or that satanic evil prosecutor and his corrupt police staff.

loverofzion,

When you raised this point before, I rebutted it in comment 23656 a week ago, as well as several time before that. With which parts of my answer did you not agree?

 

[LondonJohn]

No women of my acquaintance share underwear or bras with housemates; the vast majority say they wouldn't even share with their sister.

As for raf's DNA getting there by drying or foldng clothes, well it's posts like these that make this entire forum look ignorant.

Your last sentence is unwarranted, unnecessary and untrue.

For one thing, you're a member of "this entire forum" as well, aren't you.....?

 

[loverofzion]

Justinian 2: "The prosecution didn't provide evidence that the bra was never borrowed. Absence of evidence is..."

Did Knox ever claim that bras were shared?

This seems to be yet another example where people are claiming motives on the murderer's behalf, in spite of the fact that she has never made such claims herself.

Of course Knox never claimed they shared bras.
Againk this is just something that women don't do. Share clothes yes, underwear NO.
Just more desperado drivel by the pro innocent side; things there must be getting desperate around now.