Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
JREF2010 said:
I don't understand this comment.


Originally Posted by RoseMontague View Post
Then it is the fault of the machine and not Pati Stefi. Rats.
Click to expand...


The machine was faulty?
I don't think the machine knows the difference between the sample, or the controls.

negative , a blank run goes in and a result should be nothing.
positive , a known quantity goes in and a result of the known quantity should be the output.

this allows the tool to be known to be clean (negative) and to be calibrated (positive)

The negative is the one that often produces some garbage, some low level crap noise on the RFU chart and is why the OEM of the tool state not to go below 150RFU.

Sure, if a human wants to adjust the Y axis of the chart, they can see the garbage/noise peaks and apply it against who they want.

Maybe I'm reading this Y Axis wrong? But it seems fishy to me how they adjusted it to instill a result to a uneducated/non technical person.

If they applied the knife results using the same Y Axis as other samples, there would be no peaks seen. It would have been a flat line.

And for this manipulation of the chart Y Axis, seems to me to be something a dishonest person would do.

A great example of manipulating the Y Axis of the charts is here:
For Amanda they magnify the YAxis to make the tiny noise spikes appear large. 0- 120 or so.. For Meredith they use a normal , strong signal Y Axis of 0 to 2400.

It seems odd to me anyway.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...why_they_probably_wont_help_defense_and_may_/
Click to expand...

A sarcastic comment by Rose, surely. The rats were responsible for the bra clasp anyway, not the machine.
 
Last edited:
komponisto said:
After all, what would you think if Hellmann had not allowed Stefanoni to testify? Surely that would have been significant evidence of an acquittal in the pipeline. So it follows that the opposite outcome must be at least weak evidence in the opposite direction (yes, it really does).

It might be worth reading this. Excerpt:
Click to expand...

I think Hellman allowing Stefanoni is probably the correct thing to do.

For me personally, as I posted, its a waste of time because we already know what she will say, she's been on the stand and is going to defend her work.

For a acquittal percentage, the DNA is a huge win for the defense. But there are many who still believe in the "other proof" and that they are still guilty. Maybe some will adjust the theory that the knife wasnt in Amandas hand, but there's still some who see the media character that was created in 2007.

The case has become well known in my office and some are like Edgardo Giobbi, they just have a gut feeling their guilty, or as one said "i saw a picture of her and her eyes were shifty."
This person who said this is a PHd.

Edgardo Giobbi types dont need scientific evidence, and its possible there are some Edgardo Giobbi types on the juror panel.

The interrogation, the bathmat blob, the luminol, Filomenas room, the odd behavior many talked of.

I admit, I would vote for an acquittal with this new DNA info. But I hesitate due to reading Raffaeles Diary and his "blackout" of the evening.
I find it disturbing he can recall details before Meredith left the cottage that day, and then "blacks out" into confusion of almost everything, and then regains details from the morning of Nov 2.

Using your terminology, Raffaele's "blank out" and the Media Character Slander would support my 25% doubt.

My 75% Acquittal vote would be due to the knife failing, which destroys the past years of the prosecution painting Amanda as the one stabbing Meredith.

Whats your 25% reservation attached too?
 
Fine said:
Here's what Nick Pisa, at the courthouse, wrote today. Looks to me like the experts also saw the bra clasp dropped...


"But defence experts, professors Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, said they could find no traces of blood on the knife.
They added that the DNA from the blade was so small it should be considered "inadmissible".
They were also critical of how police had examined a clasp from Meredith's bra found at the scene and which had been "lost" for six weeks before being discovered.
Footage showed the officers picking up the clasp with dirty gloves, handing it to each other, then dropping it on the floor before picking it up without using tweezers
It was then put in a plastic bag despite the fact that the recognised protocol for such items is to use paper bags.
Experts said that other breaches included face masks not being worn and hair not being in caps, while other persons unknown were also admitted into the bedroom." See: Sky News

///
Click to expand...


Beware of courthouse quotes from Sky News.
 
Last edited:
Katody Matrass said:
Is the hearing over? I can't find any summaries on the news..
Click to expand...

I believe so and I bet your guess of Monday will be a good one. TJMK is reporting Stefanoni August 27 when the hearing resume but they were wrong about one of Rffaele's lawyers being a no show so who knows. It's like the day the music died getting any information from that darn Google thing right now.
 
Latest Reuters

Nobody reports any great success of the prosecution today. Curiously nothing about Stefanoni, too. Apparently the experts reiterated the contamination and improper methods issues.

There's no blood and no human cells on the knife, it wasn't cleaned and Comodi can't hand wave all of it away. It wasn't tested properly. It wasn't collected and bagged properly.
 
Pretty anti-climatic day. The only news is that Stefanoni will testify again, which we thought starting the week and then not....If she is allowed to why not the defense experts?

Maresca's name was curiously absent from reports today which did surprise me.
 
consistence of peak thresholds

JREF2010 said:
The negative is the one that often produces some garbage, some low level crap noise on the RFU chart and is why the OEM of the tool state not to go below 150RFU.

Sure, if a human wants to adjust the Y axis of the chart, they can see the garbage/noise peaks and apply it against who they want.

Maybe I'm reading this Y Axis wrong? But it seems fishy to me how they adjusted it to instill a result to a uneducated/non technical person.

If they applied the knife results using the same Y Axis as other samples, there would be no peaks seen. It would have been a flat line.

And for this manipulation of the chart Y Axis, seems to me to be something a dishonest person would do.

A great example of manipulating the Y Axis of the charts is here:
For Amanda they magnify the YAxis to make the tiny noise spikes appear large. 0- 120 or so.. For Meredith they use a normal , strong signal Y Axis of 0 to 2400.

It seems odd to me anyway.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...why_they_probably_wont_help_defense_and_may_/
Click to expand...
JREF2010,

If Stefanoni's lab notebook had said in advance of performing the run, we will use a lower peak height threshold (ca. 10 RFU, instead of 50 or 150 RFU or whatever she normally used), then I would feel that the knife electropherogram were obtained in a more objective manner, although I still think that such a change in protocol should be validated. But, even if those two criteria are met (setting the threshold prior to the run and doing validation studies), then the control run should be done with the same low threshold, IMO.
 
Last edited:
the defense experts should also be called

RoseMontague said:
Pretty anti-climatic day. The only news is that Stefanoni will testify again, which we thought starting the week and then not....If she is allowed to why not the defense experts?

Maresca's name was curiously absent from reports today which did surprise me.
Click to expand...
RoseMontague,

That is a good question. I thought that Dr. Hampikian was positioning himself to be called as a witness, with his positive comments about the appeals process that komponisto noted.
 
Reportedly last time Hellmann had to silence Maresca, who was acting like a maniac, by banging on the desk. I guess Maresca understands it's better not to unnerve him more. He also is clever enough to know that he's out of his league with the experts.

Interestingly no questions about the "bibliography". Did the open letter to Mignini got delayed in mail?
 
blanks

JREF2010 said:
I admit, I would vote for an acquittal with this new DNA info. But I hesitate due to reading Raffaeles Diary and his "blackout" of the evening.
I find it disturbing he can recall details before Meredith left the cottage that day, and then "blacks out" into confusion of almost everything, and then regains details from the morning of Nov 2.

Using your terminology, Raffaele's "blank out" and the Media Character Slander would support my 25% doubt.
Click to expand...
JREF2010,

Raffaele's description in front of Matteini of the night of 1 November tallies with Amanda's with respect to what they did but not when they did it. He talked a good deal about the broken water pipe. Neither he nor Amanda ever claimed amnesia, although that claim is popular in some quarters.
 
independent experts, not defense experts

Fine said:
Here's what Nick Pisa, at the courthouse, wrote today. Looks to me like the experts also saw the bra clasp dropped...

"But defence experts, professors Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti, said they could find no traces of blood on the knife.
Click to expand...
Fine,

It is interesting that Pisa refers to them as defense experts, which they surely are not.
 
There won't be hearing on Monday. Today's was the last one before the summer break.
After that Stefanoni and other experts of the prosecution from the first trial.


(Aggiornamento ore 17.42) - E’ terminata l’udienza odierna del processo, l’ultima prima della sospensione dell’attività giudiziaria per il periodo estivo. Ma lo scontro tra vecchi e nuovi periti è destinato a proseguire anche alla ripresa delle attività. Il collegio della corte d’Appello ha infatti ammesso la richiesta dell’accusa di riascoltare in aula i periti della prima perizia, sui procedimenti scientifici utilizzati e sulla modalità di refertazione dei reperti chiave.
Click to expand...
(Quotidiano Umbria)
http://tuttoggi.info/articolo/34638/
 
bolint said:
There won't be hearing on Monday. Today's was the last one before the summer break.
After that Stefanoni and other experts of the prosecution from the first trial.



(Quotidiano Umbria)
http://tuttoggi.info/articolo/34638/
Click to expand...

Well done, Bolint (did you threaten Google with a knife or what?)

Updated 17:42 hours) - It 'today completed the hearing process, the last before the court for suspension of the summer. Ma lo scontro tra vecchi e nuovi periti è destinato a proseguire anche alla ripresa delle attività. But the clash between old and new experts is expected to continue to the recovery of assets. Il collegio della corte d'Appello ha infatti ammesso la richiesta dell'accusa di riascoltare in aula i periti della prima perizia, sui procedimenti scientifici utilizzati e sulla modalità di refertazione dei reperti chiave. The board of the Court of Appeal has in fact admitted the request of the prosecution in court to hear anew the first report of the experts, on scientific processes
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

In light of recent posts this makes more sense and now promises to be very interesting.
 
I am certainly no expert, but I believe enough reasonable doubt has been established to at least request house arrest pending the outcome. Why subject them to another summer in prison?
 
The good news is that this gives K&K more time to complete the translation of the C&V report, in time for the expert testimony. I think the bad news is having to wait and to also read elsewhere how ms steffi will destroy her opposition on the stand.

The bibliography thing was pretty much ignored today and the judge prevented questioning of the independent expert's qualifications (possible grounds for appeal to the SC?).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom