Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RoseMontague]

Forgive me if I find humor in the latest conversation about the shoe print in the hall. Fine was attacked and thrown out of the discussion for posting a link that was claimed to be inaccurate. Fine was accused of running to me for all of her information. FOA and IIP were accused of intentionally providing false information and called crackpot sites. High fives all around for another victory!

Now that the information Fine provided has been proven credible this is the response given: "And what exactly does all this have to with the convictions of Knox, Guede, and Sollecito?"

I'm not sure Fine is laughing but I understand what you are saying. What is clear in The Machine's statements and the quotes from Massei is that Massei used this as part of his reasoning for guilt. The fact that it is factually incorrect means that Massei used something that was not true to establish guilt. How much else is not true we are finding out from the expert's report.

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I'm not sure Fine is laughing but I understand what you are saying. What is clear in The Machine's statements and the quotes from Massei is that Massei used this as part of his reasoning for guilt. The fact that it is factually incorrect means that Massei used something that was not true to establish guilt. How much else is not true we are finding out from the expert's report.

Sometimes things are so ridiculous that there is no other emotion possible.

 

[Katody Matrass]

This is indeed quite comical, but there is hope - the bunnies are craving for knowledge:

I don't recall Dr. Stefanoni ever stating that the mixed genetic trace was found in a bloody shoe print.

Would you care to provide a verbatim quote from Dr. Stefanoni?


knowledge, that fortunately is publicly available. Here is divine Patrizia testifying in court on 22 May 2009:

il reperto 183, campionatura L8 nel corridoio che ha dato come
risultato vittima più Knox; e vi pongo l’attenzione anche sulla forma che
avevano queste campionature, queste luminescenze, questa era diciamo
più simile, ricordava una forma di scarpa, un’impronta di scarpa

Dear bunnies, ask your versed in Italian fellows what is it that Stefi said above

 

[RoseMontague]

This is indeed quite comical, but there is hope - the bunnies are craving for knowledge:

I don't recall Dr. Stefanoni ever stating that the mixed genetic trace was found in a bloody shoe print.

Would you care to provide a verbatim quote from Dr. Stefanoni?


knowledge, that fortunately is publicly available. Here is divine Patrizia testifying in court on 22 May 2009:

il reperto 183, campionatura L8 nel corridoio che ha dato come
risultato vittima più Knox; e vi pongo l’attenzione anche sulla forma che
avevano queste campionature, queste luminescenze, questa era diciamo
più simile, ricordava una forma di scarpa, un’impronta di scarpa

Dear bunnies, ask your versed in Italian fellows what is it that Stefi said above

Yes and 183 was reported by Stefi in her DNA test results as having profiles of Amanda and Meredith:

 

[RoseMontague]

Very strange the reaction at PMF to this. Despite all the evidence they refuse to believe Massei is capable of error. I believe some are able to see the truth of this, regardless if they speak out or not. This is ominous for the court's upcoming destruction of Stefi's results. I would imagine they will ask for a verbatim quote from Darwin on that one. Go figure.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

it pays to pay attention to the experts

I think much of the confusion of the lovely bunch from PMF comes from Massei's deceptiveness. Not once does he state clearly which of the luminol traces correspond to the mixed DNA. The reason for this dishonesty is quite clear - in his conclusions he puts up a conjecture that Amanda tracked Meredith's blood barefoot.

There are inconvenient facts that disprove it immediately, when connected together:
The luminol traces are dissimilar - some are shapeless blobs, some are footprints, and one is a shoe print. There was no Meredith's DNA in any of the footprint traces. The mixed DNA was found in a shapeless blob in Filomena's room and in a shoe print in the corridor. Those two traces are far apart and form no logical trail.
So, the matter is delicate and Massei must be as vague as possible to let his illusion hold. It's a tactic that's often used in the motivation (e.g. with the shopkeeper vs cop that showed him photos issue).


Just to add: none of the traces form any logical trail and none of them tested positive for blood. No control samples were taken from the floor nearby to show that the DNA found in the traces is connected to them, meaningful and not simply commonly occurring across the cottage floor.

Hope that will be helpful to the bunnies that still read here. (We know you do )

Katody Matrass,

This is a very good summary. Right after I briefly commented at PMF last week one of the commenters there basically said he/she had heard it all before. Well, no, actually. Many of us have said for the past year or so that the prosecution should have presented better evidence, such as a confirmatory blood test, it is true. However, the quote I had provided from Dr. Lednev to the same effect was a fresh addition to the debate, and Dr. Lednev is an undisputed leader in this field.

The news center of the University at Albany (State University of New York) wrote, "Associate Professor of Chemistry Igor Lednev was recently selected as an advisory member to the White House Subcommittee on Forensic Science's (SoFS) Inter-agency Working Group on Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation. Spurred by a National Academy of Sciences report which found a convoluted forensic science system in need of revision, Lednev is among a select group of scientists and policymakers who have been tasked with shaping the course of research in the field for the next 15-20 years."

One of the commentators at PMF said that he/she went by common sense. My common sense tells me that
the luminol should have been used in early November, before the police tossed Meredith's room;
the luminol-positive areas don't form a trail;
the luminol-positive areas are unlikely all to be blood; and
one should listen to neutral experts.

 

[HumanityBlues]

Very strange the reaction at PMF to this. Despite all the evidence they refuse to believe Massei is capable of error. I believe some are able to see the truth of this, regardless if they speak out or not. This is ominous for the court's upcoming destruction of Stefi's results. I would imagine they will ask for a verbatim quote from Darwin on that one. Go figure.

Rose, have you not looked at the astrological charts?! It's going to be craziness in that courtroom according to the stars.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Yes and 183 was reported by Stefi in her DNA test results as having profiles of Amanda and Meredith:

Yes, but that document says nothing about the luminol shape that Rep. 183 came from.

To clarify this we must consult yet another document:





which says about Rep. 183:
la cui forma ricorda un'impronta di scarpa

 

[Katody Matrass]

Very strange the reaction at PMF to this. Despite all the evidence they refuse to believe Massei is capable of error. I believe some are able to see the truth of this, regardless if they speak out or not. This is ominous for the court's upcoming destruction of Stefi's results. I would imagine they will ask for a verbatim quote from Darwin on that one. Go figure.

I fully expect that they will now declare that the papers we reproduced here and Stefi's testimony are all "doctored" and falsified by "FOA"

 

[Katody Matrass]

This is huge!

Right after I briefly commented at PMF last week one of the commenters there basically said he/she had heard it all before. Well, no, actually. Many of us have said for the past year or so that the prosecution should have presented better evidence, such as a confirmatory blood test, it is true. However, the quote I had provided from Dr. Lednev to the same effect was a fresh addition to the debate, and Dr. Lednev is an undisputed leader in this field.

The news center of the University at Albany (State University of New York) wrote, "Associate Professor of Chemistry Igor Lednev was recently selected as an advisory member to the White House Subcommittee on Forensic Science's (SoFS) Inter-agency Working Group on Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation. Spurred by a National Academy of Sciences report which found a convoluted forensic science system in need of revision, Lednev is among a select group of scientists and policymakers who have been tasked with shaping the course of research in the field for the next 15-20 years."

One of the commentators at PMF said that he/she went by common sense. My common sense tells me that
the luminol should have been used in early November, before the police tossed Meredith's room;
the luminol-positive areas don't form a trail;
the luminol-positive areas are unlikely all to be blood; and
one should listen to neutral experts.

The opinion from Dr. Lednev you acquired is crushing for the Perugian prosecution, especially given his credentials. It is really worth repeating:

With respect to the luminol-positive/TMB-negative/DNA-negative areas, I asked the authors of a recent study on the forensics of body fluid identification for their interpretation. Drs. Virkler and Lednev wrote, “So, there was either no blood and the luminol was wrong, or there was blood and the TMB had interference and the luminol damaged the DNA. We think it is more likely that there was no blood, and that the luminol was reacting with something else, possibly plant matter from the bottom of the shoes causing the footprints (the intensity of the luminol reaction might give some more insight). The prosecution should have used much more convincing evidence to prove the presence of blood.”

In response to a question of mine, Dr. Virkler and Dr. Lednev concurred: “It is correct to assume that DNA profiling is not a confirmatory test for blood because it can be found in so many other things. Just confirming the presence of the victim or suspect's DNA has absolutely no bearing on what type of tissue or fluid it is. There could have been skin cells scattered in a pile of ketchup that would match a person's DNA, but that doesn't make it blood.”

 

[theRealBob]

Interesting pics in Frank's new post.

Everybody can see for themselves how was the bra clasp stored. It's crumpled into a narrow plastic airtight vial, moist inside. Patrizia is really a forensic genius. The experts will have a word of comment about that one blunder, too.

If you recall, Stefanoni was oh so precise, taking samples from various spots on that piece of evidence. Good luck with that now, when it's deformed beyond recognition. She decided nobody needs to repeat her tests, judging from what she did to that clasp. She practically ensured it wouldn't happen.

I'm certain that Stefaninny was quite sure in her own mind, that the form of storage she chose for the bra-clasp was a way to exclude the possibility of any further testing.

Funny how nobody ever bothered having a look, and check on it rotting away till C & V arrived on the scene.

 

[theRealBob]

A good point. And not only that: the Massei Report also makes the astonishing revelation that once Rinaldi (et al) decided that the bathmat print best "matched" Sollecito's reference print with regard to the big toe, they then went back and sought to match the bathmat print to Sollecito's reference print with a higher degree of accuracy!


(Massei, English trans, p340, my bolding)


This is an extraordinary admission that the "matching" was done almost entirely on a suspect-centred approach, and that Rinaldi was essentially "trying" to match the bathmat print to Sollecito's reference print!

Incidentally, in reference to all these "millimetre-accurate" measurements - the ones obtained from the bathmat all need to be taken with an enormous dose of salt. The partial print on the bathmat simply is not measurable with "millimetre accuracy" - it's made on a very thick-pile tufted bathmat, which also has a ridged pattern, it's made in a saturated mixture of blood and water, and it's impossible to accurately gauge the weight placed onto the footprint (for example, it's entirely possible that the foot only rested lightly onto the mat, while most of the body weight remained on the other foot).

Therefore, the very fact that Rinaldi - together with some of my learned friends (hehehe) - has attempted to attach "millimetre accuracy" to the bathmat print for the purposes of comparison with reference prints (which were obtained using a proper footfall onto a hard flat surface using a reference printer's ink) is not only risible and bogus, but it also (in my view) calls into question Rinaldi's basic competence and level of objectivity in this case.

The only thing you can do with the bath mat is chuck it out and buy a new one.

It is totally useless as a pointer to any certain individual involved in the crime. If it genuinely, or obviously, suggested one person over the other it might have some value. It fails to really do that so it has none.

You don't need it anyway. The lack of real evidence against R & A and continual cheating of the prosecution at every twist and turn are the real indicators that give the game away ...

 

[theRealBob]

I agree. The demonstrable presence of others' DNA on the bra clasp definitely serves to strongly bolster the argument for contamination at some point (with the two most likely candidates being the time when the clasp was finally collected from the cottage, or the time when it was tested in the lab).

But in my view (and yours too, I think), even if only one profile had been found on that clasp - and if, for the sake of argument, that profile belonged to Sollecito - the serious procedural lapses in identification, collection, transportation, storage and lab handling mean that it's highly possible that this profile was deposited through contamination (or secondary transfer).

Na. it's just fraud. It's done deliberately. that's it

 

[Bruce Fischer]

I had no idea there were so many wide spread stressors! It all makes sense now!!!

From Ergon, author of current post on TJMK:

"First, the Astrology. Meredith Kercher, born Dec. 28, 1985, and Rudy Guede, December 26, 1986, are both Capricorns. Raffaele Sollecito, March 26, 1984, is Aries, and Amanda Knox, July 09, 1987, a Cancer. Their signs form a T-Square, at 90 degrees to each other, which are widely seen as indicators of stress and incompatibility. The day of the murder saw widespread stressors on all their horoscopes which would lead to murder, detection, conviction and imprisonment. The Astrology even shows Raffaele's drug dependency and mental confusion on the night of the murder, the conflict between Amanda and Meredith, and the violence and rage that simmered just below the surface of Amanda Knox's psyche."

 

[komponisto]

I had no idea there were so many wide spread stressors! It all makes sense now!!!

From Ergon, author of current post on TJMK:

"First, the Astrology. Meredith Kercher, born Dec. 28, 1985, and Rudy Guede, December 26, 1986, are both Capricorns. Raffaele Sollecito, March 26, 1984, is Aries, and Amanda Knox, July 09, 1987, a Cancer. Their signs form a T-Square, at 90 degrees to each other, which are widely seen as indicators of stress and incompatibility. The day of the murder saw widespread stressors on all their horoscopes which would lead to murder, detection, conviction and imprisonment. The Astrology even shows Raffaele's drug dependency and mental confusion on the night of the murder, the conflict between Amanda and Meredith, and the violence and rage that simmered just below the surface of Amanda Knox's psyche."

That's not just from the same author; that is an actual quote from the latest post on TJMK!

So, longtime JREFers, what do you think....game over, or what?

(Okay, look: I know that reversed stupidity is not intelligence, and that even the strongest position will attract weak proponents. Undoubtedly, there are astrology believers on the side of innocence too. But they're not...featured on IIP or FOA. I can't imagine Bruce posting a similar article by even the most well-intentioned innocentista to the IIP blog. "Look at which side has the more generally impressive advocates" is a legitimate heuristic for coming to a quick conclusion about which side is more likely to be right. On IIP you'll find articles by research scientists, FBI agents, and forensic engineers; on TJMK you'll see anonymous posters engaging in innuendo, mind-reading, and now astrology. That's the plain truth of the matter.)

Here are some more quotes from the same post:

Amanda Knox’s profile is that of the self destructive individual who will fall from ‘the shattered tower’ due to her associations with others. Btw, her July 09 birthday is the same as OJ Simpson’s and they Both Wielded Knives, hmmm!

(...)

Rudy Guede may actually turn out to be a sympathetic individual. His is the one chart I see that leads to redemption and indescribable potential. He is, quite frankly, the most believable of the three...

(I think others have remarked before upon the peculiar sympathy that guilters seem to have for Rudy Guede.)

I'm starting to suspect that a version of Poe's Law may hold for believers in Knox and Sollecito's guilt.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

what's wrong with this pikture?

An anonymous commenter at PMF wrote, "Other than clarifying that there are 'minor traces' from other undescribed, unidentified male or males, and suggesting contamination a possibility without confirmation or demonstration, it does not negate Dr. Stefanoni's discoveries on the bra clasp.

Dr. Stefanoni and C&V are looking at the same graphs and data. Stefanoni says some markings are 'stutter', C&V call those same markings 'other' 'minor contributors' unnamed, unidentified, unknown. Sounds like they are all saying the same thing with different words."

1. The presence of other contributors makes it virtually a certainty that some of the DNA arrived by either secondary transfer or contamination (it is difficult to imagine how primary transfer could explain all traces). 2. Conti and Vecchiotti are not necessarily looking at the same graphs; much of the point in obtaining the electronic data files is being able to make graphs using slightly different parameters, as noted by Dan Krane in his report on the Leskie case. 3. Stutter is an artifact of the PCR process, as I have discussed upthread. Other minor contributors means that the allele is real. They are not the same thing at all.

 

[RandyN]

A good point. And not only that: the Massei Report also makes the astonishing revelation that once Rinaldi (et al) decided that the bathmat print best "matched" Sollecito's reference print with regard to the big toe, they then went back and sought to match the bathmat print to Sollecito's reference print with a higher degree of accuracy!


(Massei, English trans, p340, my bolding)


This is an extraordinary admission that the "matching" was done almost entirely on a suspect-centred approach, and that Rinaldi was essentially "trying" to match the bathmat print to Sollecito's reference print!

Incidentally, in reference to all these "millimetre-accurate" measurements - the ones obtained from the bathmat all need to be taken with an enormous dose of salt. The partial print on the bathmat simply is not measurable with "millimetre accuracy" - it's made on a very thick-pile tufted bathmat, which also has a ridged pattern, it's made in a saturated mixture of blood and water, and it's impossible to accurately gauge the weight placed onto the footprint (for example, it's entirely possible that the foot only rested lightly onto the mat, while most of the body weight remained on the other foot).

Therefore, the very fact that Rinaldi - together with some of my learned friends (hehehe) - has attempted to attach "millimetre accuracy" to the bathmat print for the purposes of comparison with reference prints (which were obtained using a proper footfall onto a hard flat surface using a reference printer's ink) is not only risible and bogus, but it also (in my view) calls into question Rinaldi's basic competence and level of objectivity in this case.

Is it Rinaldi that got the measurement of the floor tile wrong? And then used a unexplained mathematical formula to conjure up the print comparisons based on tile size. I’m pretty sure I remember something about this.

Garofano called the forensic team sloppy for their over application of luminol and their failure to prove the bathmat print by showing the negative of this print. It seems likely that if you walk in bare feet and then step in blood and then step on a bathmat that somewhere you have left a negative image where you stepped in the blood. General (who knew he is a General now) Garofano (Ret) claims the bathmat print is useless as evidence. It shows nothing. I tend to agree that it was made by the killer. This print could be compatible with both RS and RG. I expect it came from RG after he washed off his pant leg (Right) and while he was rinsing off his shoe and momentarily lost his balance on one foot and quickly touched down his bare foot on the mat. The partial footprint was cut off by the towel he threw down on the floor first. You know...the towels RG tried to save Merediths life with..??? A story one would expect concocted by a pathological liar or so say the step parents who tried to help him. These towels were ruined and unable to be tested completely. I expect RG DNA was there for the finding.

 

[theRealBob]

1. The presence of other contributors makes it virtually a certainty that some of the DNA arrived by either secondary transfer or contamination (it is difficult to imagine how primary transfer could explain all traces).
.

I have no idea why this has to come from secondary transfer. If Meredith had been to bed with the odd guy or two in her time that would make her the same as every other twentysomething female student around.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I have no idea why this has to come from secondary transfer. If Meredith had been to bed with the odd guy or two in her time that would make her the same as every other twentysomething female student around.

TheRealBob,

I am unaware of any reason to think that Meredith had sex with anyone other than Giacomo (I suppose it might be his DNA, but I don't think that they took his reference profile). In general I suppose it would depend on how often a woman washed her bra versus how often she had sex.

 

[LondonJohn]

That's not just from the same author; that is an actual quote from the latest post on TJMK!

So, longtime JREFers, what do you think....game over, or what?

(Okay, look: I know that reversed stupidity is not intelligence, and that even the strongest position will attract weak proponents. Undoubtedly, there are astrology believers on the side of innocence too. But they're not...featured on IIP or FOA. I can't imagine Bruce posting a similar article by even the most well-intentioned innocentista to the IIP blog. "Look at which side has the more generally impressive advocates" is a legitimate heuristic for coming to a quick conclusion about which side is more likely to be right. On IIP you'll find articles by research scientists, FBI agents, and forensic engineers; on TJMK you'll see anonymous posters engaging in innuendo, mind-reading, and now astrology. That's the plain truth of the matter.)

Here are some more quotes from the same post:




(I think others have remarked before upon the peculiar sympathy that guilters seem to have for Rudy Guede.)

I'm starting to suspect that a version of Poe's Law may hold for believers in Knox and Sollecito's guilt.

That TJMK "article" is one of the most pathetic and funniest (both funny-peculiar and funny-haha) that I've read about this case for quite some time. And, as you say, the fact that this nonsense was not simply posted as a comment, but was actually an invited contribution, is the astonishing part. The author is either a knowing fraud or suffers from a massive delusion.