Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Kaosium]

Kaosium, I've seen you write this and link this study many times before but I've often wondered if you read the conclusion where the author notes that of the 250 substances tested in the study, 240 do not produce sufficiently intense luminescence to easily be mistaken for blood.

If they glowed bright enough for only the eight to apply, they cannot be blood because they tested negative with TMB, that's what I've been getting at! Stefanoni pretended that dilution could cause the negative TMB test, as per the Massei cite in the post you responded to. If they are that diluted so as to give a TMB negative, they cannot glow that brightly. We're way past pretending you found a 'gotcha' by noticing the percentage chemiluminescence of only eight of those substances is similar to hemoglobin.

The context of my using that study in this instance was different, it was if the photography or picture program was played with to make it look brighter than it was, (meaning it might well have still been highly diluted blood) then we're back to that study with the 250 endproducts they found in common households they could have brightened so it still was basically impossible to prove it was the result of the bathmat boogie. I was falsifying my own hypothesis. Also keep in mind that list of 240 & 8 is not exhaustive, it's just what they used in that study.

However if the glow was naturally that bright then the odds are extreme it wasn't blood, the dilution case in Massei is disproven by the appearance of the photographs and Stefanoni's testimony they were that bright and the negative TMB test. Also, the one thing the 'bathmat boogie' allows for is the chaotic distribution of the footprints, as while they head in the same general direction, they don't do it like someone was just walking, but if someone was motivating themselves along on a bathmat I could see how for balance and other reasons they might end up off the mat and the distribution looking something like that. No bathmat boogie and odds again become that they weren't simultaneous to each other as the pattern would be so strangely skewed, thus they probably happened on different occasion and might well have been different little female feet, like Meredith's for the one going into her room.

Nine apparently do, which are the oft quoted turnips, horseradish, bleach etc. If the footprints are completely unrelated to the crime then is it reasonable to conclude by their strong reaction to luminol that they must be made in one of the nine? And because we know bleach dissipates rather quickly and would not be a source of interference so long after the crime, we can discount it, leaving 8 plausible substances which may have caused the reaction. Of these which do you think it was?

Truthfully, I really don't care!

If they're not blood, then of what significance is it? I'd guess probably some kind of cleaner that made similar marks when Raffaele's place was luminoled that weren't blood either. Something with a peroxidase enzyme, which is what hemoglobin imitates to assist the peroxide oxidizing the reagent to produce the chemiluminescence. I must confess I shamelessly stole that ridiculous verbiage from Chris Halkides site. In real words some plant gunk or something that acts enough like plant gunk it conspires with the naughty stuff when applied which airs it out sending sparks flying causing something sinister to happen and it lights up really cool!

No confirmatory test was done, it tested negative for blood with TMB, that wasn't caused by the age of the stain (46 days ain't long enough to interfere with a TMB test) or the dilution. At this point not only did they not prove for blood, the possibility it was blood is so remote who cares? It doesn't have to be something on that list, just something with the same substances as on that list. Chipped paint in pooled water would do it.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I've rarely encountered a young person in Europe who could not communicate at all in English. Rudy lived in a town with a high student population which included many English speakers, and many others who likely had to use english to communicate with those who did not understand their respective native tongues. Its been said Rudy had a particular attraction to this student population so unless there is evidence to prove Rudy had little to no grasp of English, common sense tells me he definitely did.

Looking at Rudy's history it seems he didn't like school and dropped out.

"We took him in as a son, but he was more interested in other things than studying and work. We gave him a job but we had to sack him because he was never there.

"In the end we asked him to leave our home because we just couldn't cope any longer and we have had no contact with him for more than a year.

The claim that Guede can't speak English appears to have come from Madison Paxton who travelled over to Italy to be with Amanda after the killing.

As for the prosecution’s sex game crime theory, which paints Amanda as the instigator and the two young men as mere pawns, Madison points out: ”Rudy doesn’t speak English, Amanda didn’t speak much Italian, and Raffaele spoke minimal English. How did Amanda orchestrate this and convince them to do it? Was this the most macabre charade ever? How did she pull that off? Because she could not.

 

[pilot padron]

Confirmation bias is alive, well and used often for innocence

bucketoftea,

Were the authorities being crooked when they claimed to have damning CCTV footage of Amanda but did not? When they claimed that Amanda's clothing was missing when it was right where she said it was? When they claimed that the German-language Harry Potter book was at the girls' flat when there was a second copy at Raffaele's? When they said that there were hundreds of picograms of DNA from the knife blade and there were not?

Why, or what is ever so different and/or unique so that every obvious lie, mis-statement, inconsistent contradiction, quirky, very suspicious, self incriminating actions and statements from Knox and Sollecito makes them only innocent confused, 153+++ hour water boarded, stupid "kids"?

Yet every single act of those horrible Italian Law Enforcers including judges and jurors makes them vengeful guilty conspirators who have this overpowering need to lie, cheat, steal, and deliberately manipulate and/or 'manufacture' evidence.
All this *alleged* incredibly unlawful behavior by individuals with a sworn duty to enforce laws..... all this just to convict "innocent kids" ??

And "as an aside":
I firmly believe the Massei described ToD is at least as credible, and probably more so than the ToD calculations expounded endlessly here and futilely grasped as a guilt 'game changer'.
The long in tooth, tired tactic of endlessly throwing this dull rusted ToD 'gauntlet' out to opposition posters as a 'challenge' whenever they dare to endure inevitable insults and appear here to argue guilt is an absurd simpleton arguing tactic that is understandably usually ultimately wisely ignored.

Lest you also, in desperation, resort to resurrect and repeatedly bray again about the overused and inapplicable argument that my preference to accept Massei's ToD is using "authority", may I suggest that your own silly reliance on Google, library cards, a doggie doctor, a vertical gardening expert and/or a biology teacher in mostly each of your own ToD arguments also unquestionably and obviously also *reeks* of identical reliance on 'authority'.
And finally, even if you reject some/all the above, is not yours admittedly a pretty thinly qualified 'authority' compared to mine ?
This despite my acknowledgement of and respect for some widely heralded post graduate degrees.
However, most of these degrees, incidentally, are unquestionably in obviously unrelated or barely related fields of study/expertise.

 

[pilot padron]

Oh Dear.... pardon my reticence to reply

Pilot,

If you have a question about something I have written then why not just ask? I personally believe that the West Memphis Three were wrongfully convicted. They got a crap deal because the prosecution refuses to admit mistakes. I don't blame the three for taking the deal as one was facing death. I am hopeful they will be able to eventually clear their names.

I am well aware of the fact that the three are on probation and the court has not acknowledged any wrongdoing.

Please note that I wish to be very careful in my arguments about remaining "on topic" and not become vulnerable in any iota to accusations I "derail" anyone or anything.

Therefore, might you be so kind and courteous as to cite, quote, or in any way direct my attention to the specific (on topic) "questioning of you" by me... on this Forum to which you above now inexplicably refer??

This, you see, would be a basic prerequisite for my replying in accordance with stated on topic/derail limitations.
Additionally, I hesitate, because I suspect you are possibly confusing me (yet again) with another poster, possibly elsewhere and definitely off topic.

 

[AmyStrange]

Of course you do...

I firmly believe the Massei described ToD is at least as credible, and probably more so than the ToD calculations expounded endlessly here and futilely grasped as a guilt 'game changer'.

Pilot Padron,

because you need the Massei miscalculation of time of death for Amanda and Raffaele to be guilty. The autopsy time of death (medical doctors know more about time of death than lawyers otherwise Massei would have done the autopsy which he didn't), Meredith's interrupted phone call to her mother which wasn't reattempted (probably because she probably tried her mother's number as she entered the house and opened her bedroom door, heard a noise, ended the call, started to pulling off her coat, and then was attacked by Guede), and Guede's Skype call referring to Meredith's scream at 9:20; all together are more credible than Massei,

Dave

 

[snook1]

Pilot Padron,

because you need the Massei miscalculation of time of death for Amanda and Raffaele to be guilty. The autopsy time of death (medical doctors know more about time of death than lawyers otherwise Massei would have done the autopsy which he didn't), Meredith's interrupted phone call to her mother which wasn't reattempted (probably because she probably tried her mother's number as she entered the house and opened her bedroom door, heard a noise, ended the call, started to pulling off her coat, and then was attacked by Guede), and Guede's Skype call referring to Meredith's scream at 9:20; all together are more credible than Massei,

Dave

That's, along with stomach contents and an empty duodendum, more than enough to establish when Meredith died. It amazes me how Massei could come up with a different time of death.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I firmly believe the Massei described ToD is at least as credible

Well if you accept that going from, it could have taken up to 4 hours for the stomach to start emptying and since it takes up to 8 hours for the stomach to finish emptying and it empties faitly quickly, then it is possible, and even probable that it had not had anything pass from the stomach at 11:30pm.

Of course it can also be pointed out that holding up Massei as an authorative source on the correctness of Massei is rather a serious case of circular reasoning.

 

[Kaosium]

I really don't think it's strange at all. Drug investigations usually take years to play out, given that the police generally just keep tabs on the lesser dealers in order to get leads on the the bigger fish. Whenever a large drug bust happens in my neck of the woods it's not uncommon to read it's been the result of several years of investigations, and multiple dealers are arrested simultaneously.

The problem here is we're missing the drug bust. Plus he ended up in prison anyway, nice way to thank him for all his hard work sleeping outside all those years. However he did end up testifying in these extraneous murder cases, and in Raffaele and Amanda's case to something utterly inane.

Oh, and to Dave (I believe) who wondered what a 'Christian Anarchist' was, it's just more proof they were all on drugs in the Seventies!

In the US, I suppose the long-haired friends of Jesus in a chartreuse microbus.

(Anyone else 'rolled up Interstate 44 like a rocket sled on rails?')

 

[bucketoftea]

When you have to exaggerate reality to this point it is a good sign that the argument has been lost.

I guess I am friends with the cashier at Target, the guy that takes my toll money, the guy that delivers my pizza, the guy that sat next to me a couple of times when we just happened to be waiting for the same train.

I guess I am friends with everyone at the Super Bowl party I attended last year because we ate out of the same chip bowl.

I could go on forever but there is no need. If you need to exaggerate the relationship between Amanda and Rudy to make your theory work, then it's time to rethink your theory.

This is a pitiful reply. Did I ever say "friend?" not a stranger. You shouldn't be beating yourself up to argue against something I never proposed.

We only have AK's word on how many times they met anyway. No reliable source has confirmed.

"Never even met" means something quite specific, and it was a lie to bolster AK's denials. BTW that whole CBS programme was nothing more than a paid advertisement for Amanda's defense. It deliberately misled. CBS (or would that be Halderman...oops..guess not) should be asking for their money back for P Ciolino's "months" of holiday...sorry, I mean investigation in Italy.

 

[Dan O.]

Meredith's interrupted phone call to her mother which wasn't reattempted (probably because she probably tried her mother's number as she entered the house and opened her bedroom door, heard a noise, ended the call, started to pulling off her coat, and then was attacked by Guede)

Dave, I thought we had clearly established within this thread that the phone call was attempted several minutes prior to the time Meredith was captured by the CCTV camera crossing the street. If you need a refresher, i'm sure we can find the published frame from the CCTV video showing the camera time stamp of 20:51:36 as Meredith crosses the street and the defense presentation demonstrating that the CCTV clock is in fact 10-12 minutes slow and not fast as the prosecution had contended.

 

[bucketoftea]

That's, along with stomach contents and an empty duodendum, more than enough to establish when Meredith died. It amazes me how Massei could come up with a different time of death.

It amazes me that you all still stand by your amateur calculations and reliance on outdated methodology.

 

[AmyStrange]

ok I see your point...

Dave, I thought we had clearly established within this thread that the phone call was attempted several minutes prior to the time Meredith was captured by the CCTV camera crossing the street. If you need a refresher, i'm sure we can find the published frame from the CCTV video showing the camera time stamp as Meredith crosses the street and the defense presentation demonstrating that the CCTV clock is in fact 10-12 minutes slow and not fast as the prosecution had contended.

Dan,

but then what interrupted her call. I don't recall anyone making an agreed upon explanation except maybe the cell tower dropped it? My theory about her interrupted call is fluid and certainly can be modified by your correction and doesn't affect the time of death credibility of the autopsy report in the least. It just seemed like a credible narrative as to why the call was interrupted.

Thank you for the information though,

Dave

 

[AmyStrange]

so you're saying...

It amazes me that you all still stand by your amateur calculations and reliance on outdated methodology.

bucketoftea,

the autopsy report is an amateur calculation?

Dave

 

[Rolfe]

It amazes me that you all still stand by your amateur calculations and reliance on outdated methodology.

It amazes me, the lengths you will go to to deny the bleedin' obvious in this respect.

Rolfe. Not an amateur.

 

[bucketoftea]

bucketoftea,

the autopsy report is an amateur calculation?

Dave

Rolfe = not an amateur vet

Rolfe et al = amateurs in the fields relevant to the investigation.

GI contents have not been regarded as reliable for years.

 

[snook1]

It amazes me that you all still stand by your amateur calculations and reliance on outdated methodology.

The autopsy report leaves no doubt about what was in Meredith's stomach and duodendum.

 

[bucketoftea]

The autopsy report leaves no doubt about what was in Meredith's stomach and duodendum.

It does. However, the method of using GI contents to determine time of death has been shown to be unreliable to the point of reversing murder covictions!

 

[Rolfe]

Rolfe et al = amateurs in the fields relevant to the investigation.

GI contents have not been regarded as reliable for years.

I've explained countless times that I'm trained in forensic post mortem work and frequently appear in court in that context.

GI contents may or may not give a reliable indication of time of death. It depends entirely on the particular circumstances of the individual death. This particular case is one of those in which the GI contents provide an unusually good indication of time of death.

And your amateur opinion doesn't change that.

Rolfe.

 

[Dan O.]

Dan,

but then what interrupted her call. I don't recall anyone making an agreed upon explanation except maybe the cell tower dropped it? My theory about her interrupted call is fluid and certainly can be modified by your correction and doesn't affect the time of death credibility of the autopsy report in the least. It just seemed like a credible narrative as to why the call was interrupted.

Thank you for the information though,

Dave

The cell tower never saw that connection.

If we interpolate between the time Sophie left Meredith and the time she is recorded crossing the street we can estimate where Meredith was at the time the call was attempted. What we find there is one of the narrowest streets in Perugia with high walls on either side. Cell phone coverage in this spot could be expected to be spotty.

 

[Rolfe]

It does. However, the method of using GI contents to determine time of death has been shown to be unreliable to the point of reversing murder covictions!

I don't think you can be quite as uncomprehending as you appear from this post.

Every case is different, and unique. In many cases the GI contents are not particularly helpful in determining time of death. In this case, as it happens, the opposite was true.

The primary court screwed up royally in this respect. For whatever reason, the judge handwaved away the compelling evidence provided by the GI contents (and other circumstantial evidence) and settled on a time of death which was in fact impossible according to the evidence presented.

This evidence is now being re-examined. I think it's unlikely that the screw-up will be perpetuated.

Rolfe.