Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Draca]

I believe there was an opened packet of mushrooms in the fridge at Meredith's cottage. My belief is that Meredith probably arrived home, and went straight to the fridge and took a mushroom. As she was eating the mushroom, she began to dial her mother's UK mobile number from her UK-registered mobile while walking back towards her bedroom. At that point, she either heard Guede in the bathroom, or Guede confronted her. She cut off the call to her mother (before it had had a chance to connect to the cellular network) in order to deal with this unexpected interruption.

LJ,

This doesn't really work. The book she borrowed was lying on her bed. Her tote bag also ended up on the floor between the wardrobe and desk; she likely had hung it on the back of the chair or something originally. It's possible that she stopped for a mushroom on the way to her room though; or that she left her room and went back to the kitchen.

I think it is more likely a piece of the baked apple. I don't feel comfortable putting the mushroom in any scenario at this time because nobody knows for sure what it is.

 

[LondonJohn]

I don't have an opinion on Sgt. Pasquali. I have an opinion on the likelihood of someone having crawled through that window.

But does it matter or not if that opinion is either uninformed or irrational (or both)? Maybe not, I guess.

 

[Draca]

Does anyone have a citation for there being a package of mushrooms in Meredith's fridge? I know this has been widely accepted but I haven't been able to verify it.

We know from the video that there was an open package of mushroom in Raffaele's fridge and this was covered by the early news reports.

I posted a photo of the mushrooms in the last thread. PMF grabbed it, so it's in their gallery under crime scene photos.

Here it is. The mushrooms are in the green carton:

 

[LondonJohn]

LJ,

This doesn't really work. The book she borrowed was lying on her bed. Her tote bag also ended up on the floor between the wardrobe and desk; she likely had hung it on the back of the chair or something originally. It's possible that she stopped for a mushroom on the way to her room though; or that she left her room and went back to the kitchen.

I think it is more likely a piece of the baked apple. I don't feel comfortable putting the mushroom in any scenario at this time because nobody knows for sure what it is.

I'd broadly agree with everything you're saying. But my point was that if it's tested and it turns out to be mushroom, then it's consistent with my scenario of Meredith taking a mushroom from the fridge after she got back to the cottage. After all, even if mushrooms were on the pizza, it's extremely unlikely that there would be a recognisable piece of mushroom regurgitated ahead of any of the apple crumble.

But, as you say, if it's tested and found to be apple, then this is perfectly compatible with a regurgitation of a piece of the apple crumble some 70 minutes after it was ingested. Of course, it would not be compatible with a regurgitation of a piece of apple some 4 hours after ingestion - as per the prosecution's/court's ToD in the first trial.

 

[Danceme]

Irrelevant details don't really interest me, I confess.

What Dr. Gino meant about the 50% figure involving TMB tests is in her experience once luminol reveals possible blood, and then the investigators check it with another presumptive test, TMB, that will eliminate the possibility of it being blood roughly 50% of the time as it's more selective than luminol, which will give a false positive with about 250 household items.

TMB is not more selective than luminol, it is the reverse that is true. It is also not true that 250 household items react to luminol. Maybe 250 items but not all those are at all likely to be found in your house. Most cleaners tested in the many studies indicate no reaction, other than pure or diluted bleach itself. I can link you to several studies indicating no reaction, try the following:

http://www.redwop.com/download/hemaglow.pdf
http://www.bluestar-forensic.com/pdf/en/false_positives_2008_study.pdf

 

[LondonJohn]

TMB is not more selective than luminol, it is the reverse that is true. It is also not true that 250 household items react to luminol. Maybe 250 items but not all those are at all likely to be found in your house. Most cleaners tested in the many studies indicate no reaction, other than pure or diluted bleach itself. I can link you to several studies indicating no reaction, try the following:

http://www.redwop.com/download/hemaglow.pdf
http://www.bluestar-forensic.com/pdf/en/false_positives_2008_study.pdf

How ironic: your two links concern commercial proprietary products called Hemaglow and Bluestar, both of which are marketed as an improvement to luminol. And the speech you've used as reference in the first link actually contains the following passage:

As luminol reacts with substances not specific to blood, luminol solutions should not be used as a “presumptive test” for blood. All luminol solutions can and do produce numerous false positive reactions. Opinions stating that a stain was blood because when he (sic) was sprayed with a luminol solution produced luminescence should be avoided!

As far as I am aware, the "crack" forensics team in the Kercher case used luminol, not Hemaglow or Bluestar (or any of the other proprietary improvements to luminol). The luminol false positives in the Kercher case might therefore stand as a potentially excellent marketing tool for Hemaglow or Bluestar

 

[quadraginta]

But does it matter or not if that opinion is either uninformed or irrational (or both)? Maybe not, I guess.

Of course it does.

Are you suggesting that mine is either? Or both?

If you are, just say so, with appropriate support for your opinion of my opinion. Otherwise we will be compelled, per your own insinuations, to suspect that your opinion is either uninformed or irrational (or both).

If you are not suggesting that, then your comment is little more than thinly disguised (undisguised?) and gratuitous insult.

 

[Draca]

The theory about it being a slice of apple rather than a mushroom is definitely put forward in Raffaele's appeal, along with a request that it be tested: they say that there were similar pieces of food found in Meredith's stomach, supporting the idea it was an apple slice, and also that when Lalli did the autopsy he knew she had eaten a vegetable pizza, so his guess that it was a mushroom was partly based on that. Not too sure whether the defence requested this testing during the trial as well, though.

The defence say that the fragment of food was never examined, just placed in a test tube and sealed, so it seems unlikely Lalli would have looked at it in any detail. They also claim there were similar food fragments in Meredith's stomach. If it was a mushroom, she must have eaten a handful of them!

I hadn't heard this before. If that's true it is probably a piece of baked apple.

From memory, I believe the girlfriends said there was no mushrooms on the pizza also.

 

[Danceme]

How ironic: your two links concern commercial proprietary products called Hemaglow and Bluestar, both of which are marketed as an improvement to luminol. And the speech you've used as reference in the first link actually contains the following passage:



As far as I am aware, the "crack" forensics team in the Kercher case used luminol, not Hemaglow or Bluestar (or any of the other proprietary improvements to luminol). The luminol false positives in the Kercher case might therefore stand as a potentially excellent marketing tool for Hemaglow or Bluestar

Bluestar's luminol preparation has been around since 2000 and Hemaglow's since before 1997 since that is the date of the paper discussing it. I don't think you have any basis to say it was not either of these products which were used. If in fact you do, please post it.

 

[Danceme]

I hadn't heard this before. If that's true it is probably a piece of baked apple.

From memory, I believe the girlfriends said there was no mushrooms on the pizza also.

You are correct about no mushrooms on the pizza, but several mentions of the mushroom,

from Massei, p.115;
" In the autopsy, Dr. Lalli noted the following: "... oesophagus containing a fragment apparently a piece of mushroom (page 46) ... stomach containing 500 cc alimentary bolus, green brown in which were recognizable caseosis (mozzarella?) and vegetable fibre ... empty duodenum, small intestine containing digested material in the last loop ...‛ (pages 47 and 48 of report).
These claims were essentially repeated at the hearing on April 3, 2009 (see pages 36 and following the hearing transcripts, April 3, 2009) in which the presence of a fragment of mushroom in the opening of the lower stretch of oesophagus was confirmed, thus in a phase of non-digestion;"

p.119
"Professor Bacci, a consultant appointed by the Public Prosecutor together with Professor Marchionni and Dr. Liviero, gave his assessment at the hearing on April 18, 2009......With regard to a piece of mushroom near the pre-cardio region that Dr. Lalli had spoken about, he said that this could not have been consumed during the afternoon/evening meal because it was in a different digestive state; therefore, he believed that some other food must have been eaten after the meal which, according to statements made by the British friends of Meredith, occurred between 6 pm and 8 pm and did not include mushrooms."

Also, p. 138
"...there was only a single mushroom and also because of the fact that pieces of apple could be distinguished in the stomach contents, indicating that they came from the victim's first meal."

So cheese, vegetable matter and pieces of apple were detected in her stomach but the mushroom is the anomoly.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

The defence say that the fragment of food was never examined, just placed in a test tube and sealed, so it seems unlikely Lalli would have looked at it in any detail. They also claim there were similar food fragments in Meredith's stomach. If it was a mushroom, she must have eaten a handful of them!

And now it's rusted and degraded and can't possibly be tested further.

 

[LondonJohn]

Bluestar's luminol preparation has been around since 2000 and Hemaglow's since before 1997 since that is the date of the paper discussing it. I don't think you have any basis to say it was not either of these products which were used. If in fact you do, please post it.

I'm interested in why you think that merely because these proprietary products (both of which, incidentally, are not luminol) had been available for some time before the Kercher murder, one or other of them would have been used by the forensic teams examining the case.

If you want, I can post every reference to the word "luminol" in the Massei report (there are more than 50 of them...) as proof. "Luminol" is itself a brand name for the chemical 5-Amino-2,3-dihydro-1,4-phthalazinedione. And, I reiterate, neither Hemaglow nor Bluestar is a form of luminol - and as such neither product would be referred to as luminol by forensics specialists.

I therefore conclude that the substance used by the forensic investigators in the Kercher case was luminol - and not one of the more effective products that have appeared on the market since luminol's shortcomings were identified and exposed. Got any decent evidence to refute that?

 

[LondonJohn]

And now it's rusted and degraded and can't possibly be tested further.

But seriously, if it were properly preserved (e.g. immersed in formaldehyde) then it could be retested. I wonder if it even still exists?

 

[LondonJohn]

You are correct about no mushrooms on the pizza, but several mentions of the mushroom,

from Massei, p.115;
" In the autopsy, Dr. Lalli noted the following: "... oesophagus containing a fragment apparently a piece of mushroom (page 46) ... stomach containing 500 cc alimentary bolus, green brown in which were recognizable caseosis (mozzarella?) and vegetable fibre ... empty duodenum, small intestine containing digested material in the last loop ...‛ (pages 47 and 48 of report).
These claims were essentially repeated at the hearing on April 3, 2009 (see pages 36 and following the hearing transcripts, April 3, 2009) in which the presence of a fragment of mushroom in the opening of the lower stretch of oesophagus was confirmed, thus in a phase of non-digestion;"

p.119
"Professor Bacci, a consultant appointed by the Public Prosecutor together with Professor Marchionni and Dr. Liviero, gave his assessment at the hearing on April 18, 2009......With regard to a piece of mushroom near the pre-cardio region that Dr. Lalli had spoken about, he said that this could not have been consumed during the afternoon/evening meal because it was in a different digestive state; therefore, he believed that some other food must have been eaten after the meal which, according to statements made by the British friends of Meredith, occurred between 6 pm and 8 pm and did not include mushrooms."

Also, p. 138
"...there was only a single mushroom and also because of the fact that pieces of apple could be distinguished in the stomach contents, indicating that they came from the victim's first meal."

So cheese, vegetable matter and pieces of apple were detected in her stomach but the mushroom is the anomoly.

Yes, I tend to agree. I think that Lalli would have had to be quite remiss to mistakenly identify a piece of apple as a piece of mushroom. That's why I still think it's fairly likely that Meredith went to the fridge when she got in (either before or after dumping her bag in her room), and took a mushroom from the packet in the fridge. I think that Guede confronted and attacked her very shortly afterwards, causing the mushroom to regurgitate from the cardia back up into the oesophagus.

But clearly there is still a strong and legitimate reason to perform a specific test on this food fragment (if it - or any portion of it - still exists) to identify it definitively.

 

[Draca]

You are correct about no mushrooms on the pizza, but several mentions of the mushroom,

from Massei, p.115;
" In the autopsy, Dr. Lalli noted the following: "... oesophagus containing a fragment apparently a piece of mushroom (page 46) ... stomach containing 500 cc alimentary bolus, green brown in which were recognizable caseosis (mozzarella?) and vegetable fibre ... empty duodenum, small intestine containing digested material in the last loop ...‛ (pages 47 and 48 of report).
These claims were essentially repeated at the hearing on April 3, 2009 (see pages 36 and following the hearing transcripts, April 3, 2009) in which the presence of a fragment of mushroom in the opening of the lower stretch of oesophagus was confirmed, thus in a phase of non-digestion;"

p.119
"Professor Bacci, a consultant appointed by the Public Prosecutor together with Professor Marchionni and Dr. Liviero, gave his assessment at the hearing on April 18, 2009......With regard to a piece of mushroom near the pre-cardio region that Dr. Lalli had spoken about, he said that this could not have been consumed during the afternoon/evening meal because it was in a different digestive state; therefore, he believed that some other food must have been eaten after the meal which, according to statements made by the British friends of Meredith, occurred between 6 pm and 8 pm and did not include mushrooms."

Also, p. 138
"...there was only a single mushroom and also because of the fact that pieces of apple could be distinguished in the stomach contents, indicating that they came from the victim's first meal."

So cheese, vegetable matter and pieces of apple were detected in her stomach but the mushroom is the anomoly.

Danceme,

Don't you find it odd that Massei refers to this untested piece of food as a piece of mushroom when it is untested? Shouldn't it be called the unknown food fragment instead.

It's possible MK had a mushroom after she arrived home. I find it unacceptable that this piece was not tested, especially after the defense requested it to be tested. I also find it confusing that it is referred to as similar to other pieces already in her stomach in an appeal and also as an anomoly by Massei.

I wish Hellmann would just approve the test already! Although, I don't see it making a huge difference if she had a mushroom when she arrived home or not.

 

[katy_did]

I hadn't heard this before. If that's true it is probably a piece of baked apple.

From memory, I believe the girlfriends said there was no mushrooms on the pizza also.

Here's the info from page 166 of Raffaele's appeal (apologies for not posting the original here, I'm typing this slowly and painfully on Kindle):

The description of the mushroom made by Dr. Lalli during the autopsy represents an as yet unresolved problem, which the Court could have clarified by way of product analysis which could well have been carried out on this fragment of food.

This is, in fact, a description made by Dr. Lalli in terms of probability and conditioned by the circumstantial historical fact that, at the time in which he performed the autopsy, Dr. Lalli had knowledge of the fact that Meredith Kercher consumed a pizza with mushrooms (as is shown by the film of the autopsy at 16:48).

This food fragment was therefore noted by Dr. Lalli and placed inside a test tube closed with a blue cap, and was never subjected to product analysis to determine the nature of it with certainty, so leaving open any hypothesis: from the presence of mushrooms in the pizza sauce (not corroborated by the circumstantial data, nor by the presence of other similar fragments in the gastric contents), to the consumption of a second meal after 21:00 (a supposition not supported by the presence of similar food fragments in the gastric contents found inside Kercher's stomach).

There's no mention of the digestive state of the food here, so no idea how reliable Bacci is on this (or whether he actually had access to the 'mushroom'/said what Massei said he said).

As you say, the girls said there were no mushrooms on the pizza so Lalli must have been mistaken on that.

 

[katy_did]

And now it's rusted and degraded and can't possibly be tested further.

I nearly wrote that I don't like to think what state the 'mushroom' is in, bearing in mind the fate of the bra clasp...

 

[LondonJohn]

How can anyone claim that Mignini's ludicrous "excuse" of budgetary problems leading to the non-recording of the interrogations on the 5th/6th November 2007 (in a regional police HQ where I suspect every single interview room has recording equipment permanently present) has any validity?

I would invite the people accepting this "excuse" to ask where Mignini and the police found the budgetary resources to tap Knox's and Sollecito's mobile phones from about 3rd-5th November 2007 - which would have had to have involved someone employed listening to those recordings and transcribing them. Yet we're supposed to believe that "budgetary constraints" meant that the same police couldn't afford a cassette tape?

This "budgetary constraints" nonsense therefore not only exposes Mignini very badly indeed, but it also exposes those who seem to accept this explanation without (seemingly) a shred of critical reasoning.

 

[Draca]

Here's the info from page 166 of Raffaele's appeal (apologies for not posting the original here, I'm typing this slowly and painfully on Kindle):


There's no mention of the digestive state of the food here, so no idea how reliable Bacci is on this (or whether he actually had access to the 'mushroom'/said what Massei said he said).

As you say, the girls said there were no mushrooms on the pizza so Lalli must have been mistaken on that.

"to the consumption of a second meal after 21:00 (a supposition not supported by the presence of similar food fragments in the gastric contents found inside Kercher's stomach)."

Thanks Katy_did.

If MK had a mushroom after arriving home part of it would be in her stomach. Yet they're saying in this appeal that similar content wasn't found there. Massei IMO should not be calling the fragment a mushroom because it really is unclear that it is at all. Ironically, he turns down the test and calls it a mushroom at the same time.

 

[Chris C]

You are correct about no mushrooms on the pizza, but several mentions of the mushroom,

from Massei, p.115;
" In the autopsy, Dr. Lalli noted the following: "... oesophagus containing a fragment apparently a piece of mushroom (page 46) ... stomach containing 500 cc alimentary bolus, green brown in which were recognizable caseosis (mozzarella?) and vegetable fibre ... empty duodenum, small intestine containing digested material in the last loop ...‛ (pages 47 and 48 of report).
These claims were essentially repeated at the hearing on April 3, 2009 (see pages 36 and following the hearing transcripts, April 3, 2009) in which the presence of a fragment of mushroom in the opening of the lower stretch of oesophagus was confirmed, thus in a phase of non-digestion;"

p.119
"Professor Bacci, a consultant appointed by the Public Prosecutor together with Professor Marchionni and Dr. Liviero, gave his assessment at the hearing on April 18, 2009......With regard to a piece of mushroom near the pre-cardio region that Dr. Lalli had spoken about, he said that this could not have been consumed during the afternoon/evening meal because it was in a different digestive state; therefore, he believed that some other food must have been eaten after the meal which, according to statements made by the British friends of Meredith, occurred between 6 pm and 8 pm and did not include mushrooms."

Also, p. 138
"...there was only a single mushroom and also because of the fact that pieces of apple could be distinguished in the stomach contents, indicating that they came from the victim's first meal."

So cheese, vegetable matter and pieces of apple were detected in her stomach but the mushroom is the anomoly.

Yes the (mushroom) is the anomoly, but its seems people try to use the mushroom to hide the fact there is nothing in the duodenum and the contents of the pizza are still in the stomach. The (mushroom) is meaningless IMO, because the empty duodenum tells the whole story.