Indeed. Conti and Vechiotti have reached conclusions based on the evidence in front of them, without any preconceptions. But the fact that some people seem to think that these two experts somehow "set out" to trash the work of Stefanoni and the "crack" forensics team also (in my view) provides an interesting window to the prevailing pro-guilt mindset. I don't think that many of them (pro-guilt people) can properly conceive of the concept of objectivity and evidence-led beliefs. The independent experts have examined the issue with open minds; the evidence has led them to the conclusion that the specific items they were asked to provide an opinion on (the knife and the bra clasp) are rotten and inadmissible for a whole host of reasons across multiple facets of their identification, collection, handling, transportation, storage, testing and interpretation.
And that leads on to a wider point: I believe that most people arguing here for acquittal (certainly including me) have no emotional bias towards either side. Rather, we have examined the evidence as it is available to us, and have (successfully, in my view) used logic, reason, additional research and deductive analysis to reach a provisional viewpoint. And that viewpoint is that there should be acquittals for both Knox and Sollecito in this case. As I and many others here have long stated, if the evidence had taken us towards guilt, we would have had no problem in arguing for conviction. And, of course, if additional evidence were somehow to come to light which was indicative of guilt and supportable as such, then I (and, I believe, many others here) would change our viewpoints readily and rapidly to a pro-guilt stance.
So, in this respect, I think that most of us here are similar to Conti and Vecchiotti (i.e. in the way in which we have evaluated the evidence objectively to reach an informed viewpoint). On the other hand, I strongly believe that most of those on the pro-guilt side of the argument have long since thrown away any attempt at objectivity or balance (if that was ever there in the first place): I think that their emotional attachments to their positions is now totally clouding their judgement. The "DNA report rebuttal" article on TJMK is just one clear example of this. One only need read the title of the article ("Analysis Suggests The Conti-Vecchiotti DNA Review Is Weak, Tendentious, Cites Non-Existent Standards"(!)) to see what's happening - and the article itself is a poster child for willful misinterpretation in order to support a prior conclusion. But that's sadly predictable.
The truth of the matter is this: Conti and Vecchiotti have produced a report which is essentially correct and accurate in every respect. The report's conclusions and methodology are completely supported by documented standards, procedures and protocols. The knife and bra clasp were indeed improperly identified, collected, handled, transported and stored, and Stefanoni's testing and interpretation methods were both improper and invalid. The court discussion at the end of the month will ultimately confirm all of this - of that I am virtually certain.
And there's really not much more to say right now. The pro-guilt crowd will continue to try to find reasons to discredit the report, and will continue to think (in their ignorant and/or confirmation-biased minds) that they've found marvellous and intellectually-rigorous ways to challenge the report's findings. They are wrong. But I guess they will have to wait until August and beyond to realise that. We rational sceptics are fortunate enough to know that already.
