Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Poppy1016 said:
The exact number of posts on PMF is 976,432
Click to expand...

But wait. That number seems ... kind of, well, larger than 65,000, or whatever number that padron fellow kept mentioning. Now I'm confused ... I thought the number of posts being high is a bad thing. Um, ah, shoot, I don't know what to do about all the posts on this forum I just joined recently. Is there a way to erase some, so people will think we are better somehow??

But wait, that padrone fellow posts on PMF, right? And they have even more, actually a lot more? Doesn't that mean they are worse? Or .... now I am really mixed up? I thought this was about talking about ideas. About questioning facts about things and being skeptical about what people say and wanting to learn the truth. But there are so many posts!! It's a big number, with lots of digits, so that has to be bad, right? But, if people are interested, they post a lot right? Maybe if they post a smaller number of times, it means each one is more valuable?? Do we get money for them??

Now I am all mixed up. I guess I should quit while I am behind. ;)
 
Poppy1016 said:
New calculation counting everything erased and deleted is 1,348,212
Click to expand...
Woah! 370,000 missing posts? That is some seriously Orwellian modding going on over there it seems.

ETA: These numbers seem really high, which sites are you including in the total? I'm fascinated by the number of deleted posts, how were you able to figure out those numbers?
 
Last edited:
Is court in session? I'm not seeing any news.

I'm starting to think that when Frank said the examination resumes tomorrow, he meant tomorrow.
 
Days of the week! An excellent way to distinguish one tomorrow from another.

Sure is quiet though. I'm only seeing tweets and articles about yesterday (Monday).
 
Today should be the day that Stefanoni face's the consequences of all her lies and all her incompetence,today is the day she gets thrown under a bus kicking and screaming in an attempt to save everybody else's career
 
Billy, I bet you one kudos and a bunch of sarcastic smileys that we get to the end of the day without anything so unequivocal happening.
 
Poppy1016 said:
I have been searching but I am so far unable to find any articles stating plastic has replaced paper collection bags. I'll keep searching though.
Click to expand...

These bags were made in the US, thus according to <Dr S, it must be OK to use them for anything. If it's French plastic, not so good.
 
billyryan said:
What is a kudo
Click to expand...

A 'Kudo' is a form of congratulations.

I think you might be wrong, though, she's already under the bus, in fact they're scraping her off the tires now. I find it hilarious that Maundy Gregory can't see it, but then again I don't think he wants to. When The Machine gives you kudos for an 'excellent article' you know you're nothing but a propaganda outlet or a badly deluded dupe. I'm hoping the latter, although it wouldn't surprise me overmuch if that site was nothing but a compilation of PMF posters, probably including Fiona, Thoughtful, and Treehorn (Jackie) with imput from Greggy.

I'd prefer to see a legitimate dupe, as I want to see him cry, whimper and whine when Amanda and Raffaele are acquitted, that arrogant cod has it coming for the way he mocked Frank Sfarzo and bought into the obsfucation campaign when his arrest was revealed and his blog shut down.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid there's a non-zero chance we might see Stefanoni do that today, those big rubber tires hurt and after yesterday's debacle she might try the ultimate form of female blackmail--'look at what those meanies did to me!' :p
 
Last edited:
pilot padron said:
* * *
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.

* * *
Click to expand...

______________________

Pilot,

The photograph of Stefanoni that Frank used was taken while she testified in the original trial, in May, 2009. I think Frank did her a favor by using it. In photographs taken of her in court on Monday---readily awailable online--- she looks about 10 years older, due to stress, I suppose.

///
 
Last edited:
RoseMontague said:
These bags were made in the US, thus according to <Dr S, it must be OK to use them for anything. If it's French plastic, not so good.
Click to expand...

LOL, I especially like your unique method for representing Stefanoni's title. I had hopes over the summer vacation she might have a talk with her conscience and decide to come clean, but I guess she prefers to try riding the storm out.

Incidentally, What do you make of this?:

Frank Sfarzo said:
Today Maresca’s performance was almost of equal value. He wouldn’t leave Carla Vecchiotti alone about the mixed DNA on the clasps. And it was the right move.
It wasn’t really clear, indeed, why C&V’s report said that there wasn’t Raffaele’s DNA on that exhibit, since, even after adding two new profiles, his alleles were still all perfectly there.
But what should Vecchiotti have done, disappoint Meredith’s lawyer? So, she explained to him.

She explained that the recovered alleles, able to form two more profiles, were not all. She had just picked those to explain the concept in the report. But, in truth, she recovered more alleles, much more –so many that it would have been too long putting them in the report.

Indeed, Vecchiotti explained, “After examining just the first 4 markers (over 17) of the Y chromosome, there were already new alleles for forming at least 8 profiles”! So she didn’t really continue to find the all of them.
For the autosomic STRs, Vecchiotti explained, “There were so many alleles that even my own profile was a match in 9 markers!” (over 16).

“Your own profile, President, could likely be found in that DNA”, Vecchiotti told Hellmann.
And she probably didn’t mean accusing him of having killed Meredith…

If we then add that 4 of the 16 autosomic markers, as Vecchiotti explained, were wrongly attributed to Raffaele’s profile, we understand why the report had concluded that there wasn’t Raffaele’s DNA on the clasps.
Click to expand...

Does this mean what I think it does? That there were even more alleles present? Especially in the y-halotype, meaning Raffaele's might not even actually been there, just enough 'coverage' from other contributors present to form a 'full profile' but not necessarily indicating it actually came from someone with Raffaele's y-halotype?
 
Last edited:
Fine said:
______________________

Pilot,

The photograph of Stefanoni that Frank used was taken while she testified in the original trial, in May, 2007. I think Frank did her a favor by using it. In photographs taken of her in court today---readily awailable online--- she looks about 10 years older, due to stress, I suppose.

///
Click to expand...

She had a lot more material to work with than Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti and they were able to report the truth that the clasp was so hopelessly contaminated that it would be possible to obtain Mignini's and Comodi's DNA profile on it, that the knife was not washed had not come into contact with blood and was not the murder weapon,instead of do what was right she chose to lie to hide evidence of innocence and to frame two innocent students,the court might because of Italian national interest decide that she made genuine mistakes rather than what I believe to be the truth that she set out deliberately to provide bogus evidence to get two students convicted of Meredith Kerchers murder after all genuine attempts to find evidence of their involvement produced nothing
 
billyryan said:
She had a lot more material to work with than Carla Vecchiotti and Stefano Conti and they were able to report the truth that the clasp was so hopelessly contaminated that it would be possible to obtain Mignini's and Comodi's DNA profile on it, that the knife was not washed had not come into contact with blood and was not the murder weapon,instead of do what was right she chose to lie to hide evidence of innocence and to frame two innocent students,the court might because of Italian national interest decide that she made genuine mistakes rather than what I believe to be the truth that she set out deliberately to provide bogus evidence to get two students convicted of Meredith Kerchers murder after all genuine attempts to find evidence of their involvement produced nothing
Click to expand...

That is what Maundy Gregory doesn't understand. I wonder if he ever considered why they might have those standards, if you can produce this without bothering with them?


On the question of the presence of Kercher’s DNA on the blade of the knife, Vecchiotti repeated the line she reluctantly gave at the last hearing before the summer break. Yes, it’s a match, you could say, but it is from a very small amount of DNA and therefore not reliable. Again, I think this is going to look like obfuscation to the judges. But only because it is. What Vecchiotti isn’t able to clarify is in what way a small amount of DNA is not reliable. From a scientific point of view, it could give rise the possibility of a false positive through contamination. But we already knew about that. Or it could give rise to “stochastic effects”, false or missing DNA peaks. But it can be seen just by looking at the DNA printouts that no such things are present. They just contain Kercher’s peaks. Again, clear as day.
Click to expand...

'Clear as day,' even though she used a 28 cycle Identifiler kit and 10 or less picograms of material, which she had to know, going in, would result in this (page 16) opportunity to produce a profile with no peaks meeting minimum standards used anywhere, and there would only be one chance she could run it. On a blade found in a drawer that had tested negative for blood, but she ran the 'test' anyway knowing it couldn't possibly withstand scrutiny, and Maundy thinks the knife is been rehabilitated. I think there's a better chance <Dr. Stefanoni will be facing 'rehabilitation' in the future! :p

So, how do you suppose she produced those 'clear as day' peaks, against all odds? Why'd she even try to? I wish they'd be rude enough to ask those questions...
 
Ms Stefanoni

Why won't Pilot stop referring to Stefanoni as Dr?
This is an international forum, we are all writing in English. If this were an Italian forum, fine. But Ms Stefanoni doesn't have a PhD, and that's the international association with the title Dr.
 
According to Barbie tweets:
-- Bongiorno isn't in court today.
-- Della Vedova cross examined Stefanoni and voices were loud.
-- They're done with Stef for now.

Seems Della Vedova's cross only lasted ten minutes.

Also according to Barbie "New expert on stand looks like dictionary entry for "scientist"."

Does anyone know which side summoned this scientist?

I can't write this late at night... I will say that various sound bites make it seem like Vechiotti (sp?) indulged in a little hyperbole. Perhaps that's what it takes to make a point in a Perugian court. Lord knows the prosecution chews the scenery.

I am thoroughly disgusted with Stefanoni as a "scientist." She is clearly not objective. No one with a scientific mindset would deny that haphazard collection procedures increase the likelihood of contamination. At the same time, I hope C&V were more focused on speaking the truth than on attacking Stefanoni. Perhaps, they were. I suppose these crazy forums have a way of turning everything into "us" versus "them," as opposed to fact versus distortion. What I'm saying is that IMO it's crucial C&V presented themselves as INDEPENDENT experts, not hired guns.

This is all apropo of wondering if the new expert is a hired gun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom