Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[RoseMontague]

This was from the July 30, 2011 hearing? Do you have the quote from Comodi (or even better yet, the July 30 hearing transcript ). Would Stefanoni write down a negative control or is that a function done by the machine?

Two things I have found interesting while reading (and that is if they are recorded correctly by media):

Stefanoni stating that the experts could have used a newer, better kit to analyze the traces on the knife: http://www.grr.rai.it/dl/grr/notizi...5-ad7c-47ca-a37e-319bcdfae264.html?refresh_ce and the fact there are documentation of negative controls concerning the knife and bra clasp: http://www.localport.it/eventi/notizie/notizie_espansaN.asp?N=78583

Does anyone know what a document of a negative control would look like?

LCN DNA is not just about detecting lower amounts, it is a process. The lower amount you can find the more the potential for contamination. LCN processes were not observed in the gathering or testing of evidence, nor were even standard processes observed for normal DNA testing.

You should read what Greggy posted about LCN at PMF today.

 

[Mary_H]

I guess the Kercher family’s focus is different than Raffaele and Amanda’s family; they have lived with Meredith’s senseless and brutal murder for the past four years, regardless of the outcome of this appeal nothing changes for them.<snip>

That has been true from the beginning. Meredith's murder and Amanda and Raffaele's incarcerations are two separate issues.

Regarding the letter to the judge: people write letters to judges all the time; I've done it myself, but it was for a non-juried trial. Customarily, no one is allowed to write letters to the jury -- that defeats the purpose of the trial, in which the lawyers are given equal opportunities to present their cases.

Guided by their Italian lawyer, when John and Stephanie Kercher write to the general public or to the judge, they know they are writing to the jury. If they find that helpful to their case, then they are admitting that the tabloid crusade was harmful to the defendants' case in the first trial.

 

[RandyN]

Originally Posted by pilot padron
However, the conclusion below is much more aligned to my thinking and that of most other neutral and/or non FOA sources that I have seen today.

"This was a bizarre comment by Vecchiotti, which may call into question her own methods and possible contamination on her part."

Who is that quote attributed to, what is the source?

I'm guessing the initials are PQ or PG.

 

[Onofarar]

Unbelievable, whether you think they are innocent or not. Well, postpone or exonerate must be the only option. How could a court of law in any country accept evidence of guilt after a four trial process, when it's not properly examined?

If Hellmann doesn't postpone to examine, how can he convict?

I think Hellman knows exactly what the prosecution is up to - delay - delay - delay. He will now proceed on parallel paths - continue to follow the schedule for SeEptember that was laid out earlier and use non-court days to examine this purported "evidence" submitted by the prosecution.

He wants AK & RS out as soon as possible.

 

[MiloMinderbinder]

Nick Pisa in full reverse-ferret mode:

When you see a Pisa piece headlined "DNA Evidence Slammed At Amanda Knox Appeal", you know the game has changed.

This quote is also telling:
"Although she appeared tired, she managed to smile at her friends and family, and Italian TV footage showed her winking at her co-accused Raffaele Sollecito, 27."

I'm sure you and others saw the "footage" of them "looking at each other" and it is not clear at all that they were even looking at each other. While they might have been, the editing certainly appears to be a hack job effected to make it appear that they were eyeballing each other instead of making normal facial gestures to someone else. Of course, Pisa accepts this bit of "reporting" without question and passes it along to others.

 

[RandyN]

It would be nice to be able to present counter arguments to this, except that I have no idea what you are talking about. I suspect few others do either.

Well Doug,

You could join up over there at TJMK and argue the point with Peter or you could join up over there at PMF and argue with Peggy. I personally think these are Perterisms so TJMK is your best shot.

FWIW you will only get one shot and so make a screen capture because you will be quickly banished and your IP will be blocked.

Try it just for a fun exercise...

Any bets how far he actually gets?

 

[RandyN]

Well, this is one more reason for the case to wrap up. I understand that valid points can be made on both sides; I just think that any standard of reasonable doubt or "doubt in favor of the accused" as the Italians put it, ought to lean strongly toward questioning the verity of the convictions. Of course Maresca and Stefononi will score some points, and have some validity to their cause. I just think that Hellman and his jury should be pulled by doubt, serious doubt. and Pilot seems to not see that one truth a victory does not make....

@pilot padron: Here is what I concede to you:
Dr. Stefononi, and Francesco Maresca, have some valid arguments and are able to make some inroads. The overturning of the convictions of Knox and Sollecito are NOT a done deal. But there is enough doubt, if one follows the Kantian universal standard, to make overturning of them extremely compelling. Not all who are "pro-innocence" are viewing all through rose colored glasses, or silly infatuation or fatalism or the like....

Rose colored scientific glasses...see there is a difference.

 

[Onofarar]

Originally Posted by pilot padron
However, the conclusion below is much more aligned to my thinking and that of most other neutral and/or non FOA sources that I have seen today.

"This was a bizarre comment by Vecchiotti, which may call into question her own methods and possible contamination on her part."





I'm guessing the initials are PQ or PG.

Per a post above it was actually FM.
BTW - if you were ranking them from most despicable to least despicable in what order would you place GM, MC, FM, PS, PG and PQ? FM has moved to the top in my opinion - as htings get more desparate for the guilters his actions seem more and more on a path to maintain the convictions at any cost forget about finding the truth! BUT then he has the most MONEY to lose!!

 

[RandyN]

Have I got this straight?

First the prosecution said these negative controls had been submitted to the court as part of the original evidence file, but a detailed search failed to find them.

Then they said, oops sorry here they are, but when the proffered documents were examined it became apparent that the serial numbers were wrong and blurry. The judge refused to admit these items in evidence.

Then they waited the entire summer recess, until the hearings resumed, and came back again with a second "oops sorry here they are". We found them in the garage.

Then they said, but the appointed experts could have had them at any time, if only they'd asked for them?

Are we supposed to infer, therefore, that their original assertion that the controls were already admitted in evidence was false? And that the first new set offered, which was not accepted, were indeed the wrong documents? And that even though this new set of controls was mislaid in a garage and apparently only found after much searching and at least one false discovery, they could have been produced "at any time"?

Am I the only one thinking, liar, liar, pants on fire....?

Rolfe.

Nope...I think Hellmann thinks the same thing.

Remember at the last hearing when Comodi demanded that the negative control sheet be entered into the record. And then Hellmann told her NO. He further explained to her that even if she had the proper negative control sheet and it was properly entered into the record it would not disprove contamination.

Member dat? I guess Comodi forgot... I’m betting Hellmann and Zanetti did not forget.

 

[Kaosium]

Hey, I bet someone could find the missing/unaffordable video of the Knox interrogation in a garage too.

I see many think Hellman has already made up his mind. Still, I don't think the defense should take any risks. Seeing as the prosecution is determined to drag things out, IMO the defense should do the same. I hope they press for further examination of the computer data and ToD.

I also hope they present a crystal clear summary of the prosecution's numerous errors, omissions, and dirty tricks. The list is long, and I don't think the general public is aware of ALL of the shenanigans.

My fear, regarding Hellman having already made up his mind, is that he may view sentence reduction as an acceptable compromise -- as a way to judge Knox/Sollecito less guilty, while appeasing the mob of indefatigable prosecutors. I don't think it's safe to assume he is entirely immune to the pressures of the Perugian good-old-boy network.

I wonder now if they will begin to regret initiating three additional court proceedings, two regarding the interrogation, one the police collection methods. There's plenty of opportunity for more truth to come out after Raffaele and Amanda are out of prison.

 

[charlatan]

Per a post above it was actually FM.
BTW - if you were ranking them from most despicable to least despicable in what order would you place GM, MC, FM, PS, PG and PQ? FM has moved to the top in my opinion - as htings get more desparate for the guilters his actions seem more and more on a path to maintain the convictions at any cost forget about finding the truth! BUT then he has the most MONEY to lose!!

This is what happens when you work backwards from presumed guilt rather than forwards from presumed innocence. It becomes impossible to 'reform' the image of a person you've demonized over many years, even as exculpatory evidence comes to light. If a video were discovered showing Rudy breaking into the cottage at 8PM and leaving at 10PM with blood on his pant leg, these same people would simply concoct another theory of Amanda's involvement. It will never end.

 

[komponisto]

Per a post above it was actually FM.
BTW - if you were ranking them from most despicable to least despicable in what order would you place GM, MC, FM, PS, PG and PQ?

It's really almost a six-way tie, but if I had to make a list:

1. PQ
2. FM
3. GM (could refer to either of two people, both of whom belong about here!)
4. MC
5. PG
6. PS

 

[AmyStrange]

-

Two new post up by Frank:

http://perugiashock.com/

an interesting quote from the testimony of Dr. S:

" ...She also revealed why you can put samples in plastic bags without that to cause problems: because you can store them in the victims freezer… That’s what she did on November 2 and 3, before bringing the samples to Rome: she froze the samples in the refrigerator of the house. That little freezer was quite capacious, it seems... "

Frank uses this as an ongoing joke throughout the rest of his report... well done Frank,

Dave

 

[Mary_H]

Hey, I bet someone could find the missing/unaffordable video of the Knox interrogation in a garage too.<snip>

What a remarkable idea. Who would ever think to look in a garage?

Priceless Picasso works found in a garage

Rare Bugatti Found in British Garage

Missing Bronx Zoo Peahen Found In Garage

Tiffany treasures found safe haven in garage

Found in a German garage: 'Hitler's Mercedes'

 

[Dougm]

Well Doug,

You could join up over there at TJMK and argue the point with Peter or you could join up over there at PMF and argue with Peggy. I personally think these are Perterisms so TJMK is your best shot.

FWIW you will only get one shot and so make a screen capture because you will be quickly banished and your IP will be blocked.

Try it just for a fun exercise...

Any bets how far he actually gets?

On the few occasions where I have read over there, I have seen people banned for simply asking questions contrary to the popular line, even though they claim to be pro-guilt. No thanks! I was just trying to make the comment many others have made here already.

BTW, the over/under would have been 2 posts!

 

[JREF2010]

-

Two new post up by Frank:

http://perugiashock.com/

an interesting quote from the testimony of Dr. S:

" ...She also revealed why you can put samples in plastic bags without that to cause problems: because you can store them in the victims freezer… That’s what she did on November 2 and 3, before bringing the samples to Rome: she froze the samples in the refrigerator of the house. That little freezer was quite capacious, it seems... "

Frank uses this as an ongoing joke throughout the rest of his report... well done Frank,

Dave

I dont get the freezer idea...

the bra clasp was laying around in the dust pile, and possibly stepped on a hundred times and who knows what else, maybe even passed around and rubbed with thumbs and forefingers....

but anyway, what was the reason for the freezer again after the clasp had been laying around 46 days?

 

[pilot padron]

Sorry I am not nearly as impressed as you apperently were

-

Two new post up by Frank:

http://perugiashock.com/

an interesting quote from the testimony of Dr. S:

" ...She also revealed why you can put samples in plastic bags without that to cause problems: because you can store them in the victims freezer… That’s what she did on November 2 and 3, before bringing the samples to Rome: she froze the samples in the refrigerator of the house. That little freezer was quite capacious, it seems... "

Frank uses this as an ongoing joke throughout the rest of his report... well done Frank,

Dave

This latest blog from Sfarzo is just that; another blog.
Unrestrained and encumbered by the straightforward requirements for factual reporting, Sfarzo blogs out his usual few feeble paragraphs filled with personal opinions, unsupported off the wall conclusions, snark, obvious errors, and simpleton slapstick about the refrigerator.
(Of course, due to recent legal entanglements, the snark is now much less vicious)

EXAMPLES

1) Sfarzo headlines a picture of Doctor Stefanoni with this:
STEFANONI’S SELF DEFENSE, DAY 1,

and captions it with this:
"Then it was the time of Stefanoni’s self-defense, under the friendly questions coming from Comodi."

Small problem, blogger Sfarzo:
That particular picture sandwiched between your two misleading accompanying statements was definitely taken several months ago.
As such, it has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the way you present/spin it in your blog.

2) And his erroneous employment of that big word 'capacious' was funnier to me than his refrigerator attempts.
How 'capacious' would it have to be, Sfarzo to hold a couple small miniscule samples...in USA manufactured plastic ??
But maybe he was taking a correspondence course in communications engineering and saw that big word along with the equally big but equally not applicable 'marmalade'.

But again a blog is a report not.

Color me unimpressed.
Concluding, I for obvious reasons will withold any echo to your rather fawning closing "well done, Frank"

BTW:
All those who endlessly express such umbrage and moral outrage in their arguments here about some guilters using 'pen' names of course are fully aware of Sfarzo's shameless use of same.

 

[AmyStrange]

It's an old magician's trick...

I dont get the freezer idea...

the bra clasp was laying around in the dust pile, and possibly stepped on a hundred times and who knows what else, maybe even passed around and rubbed with thumbs and forefingers....

but anyway, what was the reason for the freezer again after the clasp had been laying around 46 days?

-

Dr. S. diverted her audiences attention by making believe she was explaining why using plastic bags was ok for the samples her forensics team picked up on November 2nd, because they put them in the freezer, but (like you picked up on) this in no way explained why it was ok to "store" the bra clasp in a plastic bag, which obviously wasn't stored in a freezer.

Good catch Dr. J,

Dave

 

[Diocletus]

But again a blog is a report not.

What's this? Frank's posting is a blog? No one ever told me that! That settles it. I don't care that he actually attends the hearings, that he's been following the case from the beginning, that he reports things that no one else seems to mention, that he's almost always right and that he's funny. If it's a blog, then it's dead to me.

I will now stick to reading Barbie Nadeau, who frequently gets things wrong, is in the process of a rapid retreat, appears to have no understanding of legal proceedings and also isn't very smart. At least she's not a blogger . . . at least I don't think her postings are blogs. Hmm.

 

[AmyStrange]

who cares...

This latest blog from Sfarzo is just that; another blog.
Unrestrained and encumbered by the straightforward requirements for factual reporting, Sfarzo blogs out his usual few feeble paragraphs filled with personal opinions, unsupported off the wall conclusions, snark, and simpleton slapstick about the refrigerator.
(Of course, due to his recent legal problems, the snark is now much less vicious)

Sfarzo also headlines a picture of Doctor Stefanoni with this:
STEFANONI’S SELF DEFENSE, DAY 1,

and captions it with this:
"Then it was the time of Stefanoni’s self-defense, under the friendly questions coming from Comodi."

Small problem, blogger Sfarzo:
That particular picture sandwiched between your two misleading accompanying statements was definitely taken several months ago.
As such, it has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the way you present/spin it in your blog.

But again a blog is a report not.

Color me unimpressed.
Concluding, I for obvious reasons will withold any echo to your rather fawning closing "well done, Frank"

BTW:
All those who endlessly express such umbrage and moral outrage in their arguments here about some guilters using 'pen' names of course are fully aware of Sfarzo's shameless use of same.

-

I've never complained about pen names and have always maintained that a lot of people (both sides) do bad and good things in the name of debate so like I said... who cares. This is a debate, not a court of law, so color me unimpressed also, besides I was mostly commenting on the way Frank used the freezer as an ongoing joke. It's called black humor and although I don't find it particularly funny (ha ha ha funny), as anyone who has followed homicide cases for real knows, black humor is what sometimes get detectives (reporters etc.) through real horrible crimes like this one.

Sorry if that disturbs anyone,

Dave

P.S. you can call it what you want, but it is a report to me (and a damn good one for that matter in my opinion), and I stand by that description, but that is just so petty of me to even care what anyone thinks Frank's blog post are to me. Just so damn petty. Sorry everyone...