Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[vwgub]

Questions:

Was one of Sollecito's pocket knives (or "vicious-hunting-knives-whose-only-purpose-is-the-killing-of-animals-and-humans" if you prefer the pejorative description) confiscated by the police?

If such a knife was confiscated, was it found to have blood on it?

If such a knife was confiscated, was it found to match the knife imprint on the bedsheet?

If such a knife was confiscated, was it found to be compatible with the smaller, thinner wounds in Meredith's neck?

If such a knife were of any evidentiary value at all, why wasn't it mentioned in media reporting of the trial?

If such a knife were of any evidentiary value at all, why wasn't it mentioned in the Massei report, other than these brief mentions of a knife seizure on page 100 and 106 of the English translation:




And this brief mention of the seizure of the flick knife which Sollecito brought to the police station, on page 105 of the English translation:




Further on in Massei (page 194, explicit reference is made to one of these knives being tested for blood, with negative results:




After this, these knives are never mentioned again in Massei, and neither knife appears to have been assigned an exhibit number. I wonder why not...?

Why? Don't just JAQ off tell us. And please don't make me go CFLARSEN on you.

 

[odeed]

I am quoting, in part, what LondonJohn wrote:



I am still not sure whether the bag to collect the knife was or was not a proper one (evidence collection bag). Hopefully the independent experts will review everything concerning the knife - from its collection in the flat to its testing and reading of the chart in the lab.
....

Paper bags or envelopes are recommended for dry trace evidence, even when DNA maybe on them.

 

[Draca]

Here's another thing: reading though Massei for references to Sollecito's pocket knives, I noticed some information regarding the collection and transportation of the kitchen knife (Exhibit 36). It appears to be a fact that the knife was placed into an ordinary paper envelope when it was collected from Sollecito's apartment - that's to say an ordinary, non-sterile paper envelope, as opposed to a proper sterile evidence collection plastic bag:


Massei, p254


Massei, p106

(Note the rather pathetic explanation that the non-sterile ordinary paper envelope into which this crucial (as it turned out) exhibit was placed had "never been previously used" - that's alright then!)


So, the knife is improperly placed in a regular non-sterile paper envelope for transportation to the police station. It's then clear from Massei that this envelope was opened inside the police station, that the knife was removed from the envelope inside the police station, and that the knife was then placed into a non-sterile cardboard box that had previously contained a desk diary (you really couldn't make it up!!):


Massei p107


So, let's recap: The knife was placed into a non-sterile paper envelope (the type used for posting large letters) when it was collected at Sollecito's apartment. It was then removed from this non-sterile envelope at the police station, and placed into another inappropriate non-sterile container (a box which had contained a desk diary!).


Now, to top things off, we have Stefanoni justifying the collection technique and storage receptacles used for the crucially-important kitchen knife:


Massei, p214

Stefanoni here actually appears to intimate that the "circumstance" through which the knife had been gathered meant that its improper and irregular means of storage and transportation were somehow OK.

If that's what she was intimating, then not only is this a ridiculous statement in and of itself, but it's doubly ridiculous given that the police went to Sollecito's apartment specifically to gather evidence. Why did the "crack" forensics team not have a selection of appropriate sterile evidence collection bags with them when they entered Sollecito's apartment for the search? And even if they didn't have them, they were under no immediate time pressure to seize the knife - the apartment was unoccupied and Sollecito was in custody. Why couldn't oneof the "crack" team have gone back to the station and picked up a suitable sterile evidence collection bag?

And once the initial mistake had been made (placing the knife in a regular paper envelope), why was the mistake compounded inside the police station by removing the knife from one improper receptacle, only to place it into another improper receptacle?!


This whole thing seems to reek of sheer incompetence (at best) and malpractice (at worst). I trust that the appeal will be dealing appropriately with this area of the knife evidence.

LJ,

At what point was the knife put in the sterile bag it is seen in here:

 

[vwgub]

LJ,

At what point was the knife put in the sterile bag it is seen in here:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_401664d54c75c2bb6b.jpg[/qimg]

When was it put in the bag?

 

[Kaosium]

Evidence tampering of course.

Seriously, I can't believe how anyone would think that the tactic of the defense is to say "see, no blood inside the knife, this means that the blood on the knife was planted".

I think it pointless whether blood is inside the knife or not.

Actually, no, it would make the knife evidence of murder. That's the significance of Maresca jumping to his feet. That knife as it stands is not evidence of murder. It was to the prosecutions' gain to open up that knife, one more thing for me to type in the litany of why it is not evidence of murder is nothing compared to finding Meredith's blood there and completely decimating all my tediously typed out reasons.

It wouldn't put Amanda in that room, but it would strongly suggest that she or Raffaele were involved with Rudy and tried to cover it up. However Maresca jumping up like he juiced his drawers is just one more thing for me to try to remember as proof that knife never left the drawer that night. Even he knows it's bogus.

 

[vwgub]

Actually, no, it would make the knife evidence of murder. That's the significance of Maresca jumping to his feet. That knife as it stands is not evidence of murder. It was to the prosecutions' gain to open up that knife, one more thing for me to type in the litany of why it is not evidence of murder is nothing compared to finding Meredith's blood there and completely decimating all my tediously typed out reasons.

It wouldn't put Amanda in that room, but it would strongly suggest that she or Raffaele were involved with Rudy and tried to cover it up. However Maresca jumping up like he juiced his drawers is just one more thing for me to try to remember as proof that knife never left the drawer that night. Even he knows it's bogus.

How does this show Amanda is innocent?

 

[Draca]

How does this show Amanda is innocent?

vwgrub,

Not finding blood in the knife handle will not show anything either way. It may at most make it seem even less likely that the kitchen knife was involved.

If they did find Meredith Kercher's blood though it would change everything. The prosecution is claiming this is the murder weapon. Why wouldn't they want it opened in hopes of finding evidence in the knife?

That the prosecution is protesting the knife being opened, with everything to gain and nothing much to lose, makes it look like they know full well the knife is not involved.

The defense is asking for the evidence used to convict to be reviewed. The DNA sample or testing records.

 

[vwgub]

vwgrub,

Not finding blood in the knife handle will not show anything either way. It may at most make it seem even less likely that the kitchen knife was involved.

If they did find Meredith Kercher's blood though it would change everything. The prosecution is claiming this is the murder weapon. Why wouldn't they want it opened in hopes of finding evidence in the knife?

That the prosecution is protesting the knife being opened, with everything to gain and nothing much to lose, makes it look like they know full well the knife is not involved.

The defense is asking for the evidence used to convict to be reviewed. The DNA sample or testing records.

Again how does this show AK is innocent.

 

[Draca]

Again how does this show AK is innocent.

I wrote "Not finding blood in the knife handle will not show anything either way". That was your answer.

Is there some reason you are asking? Why do you think it has to show she is innocent?

What will show she is innocent is retesting the DNA sample or if that's not possible reviewing the testing protocol and finding it faulty.

 

[vwgub]

I wrote "Not finding blood in the knife handle will not show anything either way". That was your answer.

Is there some reason you are asking? Why do you think it has to show she is innocent?

What will show she is innocent is retesting the DNA sample or if that's not possible reviewing the testing protocol and finding it faulty.

I don't know tell me.

 

[Dan O.]

Since she was able to obtain a result(s) and the knife was not collected in conditions cited above the conservation was correct.

I would expect that any introductory text on DNA collection would emphasize the requirement to both prevent degeneration of the sample and prevent contamination with other DNA. Being able to extract a profile doesn't assure that either of these conditions we're met.

 

[Kaosium]

How does this show Amanda is innocent?

It puts about the tenth nail in the coffin of that ridiculous 'murder knife' and leaves absolutely nothing that could be confused as ever possibly being in that room bearing a trace of Amanda.

However, more importantly, it shows that Maresca and Comodi know this too, as if they opened up that knife and found Meredith's blood then all of a sudden that strongly suggests it was used for the one wound it could probably make, implying it was used in the murder and how it got back into Raffaele's drawer with Amanda's DNA on the handle implicates her in at least a cover up.

Thus basically Maresca and Comodi jumping up to protest this possible search for Meredith's blood where it couldn't be cleaned off definitely suggests they both know damn well that knife had nothing to do with the murder.

 

[vwgub]

Maresca and Comodi

Who are these people?

 

[Draca]

Maresca and Comodi

Who are these people?

Manuela Comodi
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=124470897577390&set=a.131623500195463.16991.106344459390034

Franceso Maresca
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=124470897577390&set=a.131623500195463.16991.106344459390034#!/photo.php?fbid=131653653525781&set=a.131623500195463.16991.106344459390034&pid=241090&id=106344459390034


Comodi is one of the prosecutors, Maresca is the Kercher family's lawer

 

[vwgub]

Manuela Comodi
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=124470897577390&set=a.131623500195463.16991.106344459390034

Franceso Maresca
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=124470897577390&set=a.131623500195463.16991.106344459390034#!/photo.php?fbid=131653653525781&set=a.131623500195463.16991.106344459390034&pid=241090&id=106344459390034


Comodi is one of the prosecutors, Maresca is the Kercher family's lawer

You give me facebook pages about the AK case. Never mind I can't acutally a find non biased biography about either of them.
Thank you very much.

 

[Draca]

You give me facebook pages about the AK case. Never mind I can't acutally a find non biased biography about either of them.
Thank you very much.

I was giving you photos of them so you can see who we're talking about.

 

[vwgub]

I was giving you photos of them so you can see who we're talking about.

Thank you for that.

 

[Kaosium]

I don't know tell me.

If you're curious, here's the litany of why that 'murder knife' they found in Raffaele's drawer and found a tiny smidgin of Meredith's DNA on the blade had nothing to do with the murder, even though it sounds damning at first, which is why they used it:

The DNA was LCN, past the 'too low' setting on the machine, they refused to release the EDF files, and the uncertified lab makes the risible claim it has never had any contamination. It didn't match the outline on the bed, at least one and probably two of the major wounds, and the last could have been made by anything from a box cutter to a broadsword. The 'DNA' was not blood and was curiously found right on the blade and nowhere else, but the knife was never opened so the cracks where it couldn't be cleaned could be checked for blood traces.

The handle somehow bore traces of Amanda's DNA but not any of Meredith's blood, that being just about impossible considering the nature of the only wound it could have definitely made. There was no trace whatsoever of Amanda in the murder room, highly implausible if she was supposed to be wielding that knife in a vicious struggle. It was plucked from a drawer by 'police intuition' leaving other knives behind, and does anyone really believe they planned to eat with it?

That's a conservative litany too, as the independent expert testified it didn't match any of those wounds, being as the width of the knife was about double the incisions. Also you have to wonder how if it was "extremely clean" as noted by the Massei Report when taken from that drawer, just how it ever ended up with anyone's DNA on it...

The last sounds sinister, but I think the most plausible explanation was the blade had been cleaned from them eating and put away by Amanda leaving a trace on the handle, and they took it into the lab which had no business even trying to find LCN DNA and got a miniscule trace of Meredith's DNA on it through contamination as Meredith's stuff was being tested there too. The sample was so small it isn't even a repeatable test, and will likely be thrown out as a result of the independent review that should have been conducted at the first trial. It was a damning indictment of the prosecution that they ever took trash 'evidence' like this into court and tried to pretend it was a 'murder weapon.' They might as well have found Meredith's DNA in a fishbowl and tried to pretend the fish was involved!

Can you see why I get tired of trying to remember and type all this? I will be so glad when it is gone!

 

[Antony]

Again how does this show AK is innocent.

It doesn't in itself show Amanda (or Raffaele) is innocent; what it shows is that Maresca and Mignini have an agenda which does not include establishing the truth.

There are plenty of other indications that both Amanda and Raffaele are innocent, such as the time-of-death based on Meredith's intestinal contents.

 

[Fine]

If you're curious, here's the litany of why that 'murder knife' they found in Raffaele's drawer and found a tiny smidgin of Meredith's DNA on the blade had nothing to do with the murder, even though it sounds damning at first, which is why they used it:

The DNA was LCN, past the 'too low' setting on the machine, they refused to release the EDF files, and the uncertified lab makes the risible claim it has never had any contamination. It didn't match the outline on the bed, at least one and probably two of the major wounds, and the last could have been made by anything from a box cutter to a broadsword. The 'DNA' was not blood and was curiously found right on the blade and nowhere else, but the knife was never opened so the cracks where it couldn't be cleaned could be checked for blood traces.

* * *

That's a conservative litany too, as the independent expert testified it didn't match any of those wounds, being as the width of the knife was about double the incisions. Also you have to wonder how if it was "extremely clean" as noted by the Massei Report when taken from that drawer, just how it ever ended up with anyone's DNA on it...



Can you see why I get tired of trying to remember and type all this? I will be so glad when it is gone!

_______________

Kaosium,

I think you are mistaken. No witness ---"independent expert" or otherwise---contested the dimensions of the knife wounds to Meredith's neck. Those dimensions were provided by Dr. Lalli, the coroner, and accepted by all. Likewise, no one contested the dimensions of Raffaele's kitchen knife. So, clearly, if the width of the kitchen knife was too wide to match any of those wounds,...umm, well, mathematics alone would have excluded use of that knife against Meredith. (In which case we wouldn't be having this conversation.)

Perhaps you were confused by an error in translation of the Massei Motivations Report (page 126), where length of knife was confounded with width of knife.
See PMF > Board Index > Projects for Meredith > Translation Error Report Thread.

///