Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Diocletus]

Stefanoni's and Novelli's statments go like this (and where I am wrong please correct): There were 133 samples taken from the flat, 89 of those from Meredith's room. Only one from the flat had the DNA of Sollecito (a cigarette butt with the shared DNA of Knox and Sollecito) and the inside the room the bra clasp with the mixture DNA of Meredith and Sollecito. If contamination comes from dust well dust is everywhere and Sollecito's DNA did not turn up anywhere else except on those two items.

What good is this observation? These numnuts couldn't even find Knox's DNA in her own room.

 

[smkovalinksy]

Does anyone know if the dates for this tentative schedule still hold, or will they continue with forensics tomorrow, thus delaying all?

Tentative Knox/Sollecito Appeal Schedule for Sep 2011: 5/6 forensics; 7 prosecution close; 8 civil close; 9 sollecito close; 10-knox close; 26/27 rebuttal; 28 - VERDICT

 

[AmyStrange]

That's the way I read it too...

DNA mixtures are difficult to analyze. Meredith's profile is not difficult to match from a mixture on the bra clasp and Sollecito's profile was expanded to the Y-haplotype test which is not definitive, however, I'm fairly certain Vecchiotti's profile would not match the Y-haplotype .

Stefanoni's and Novelli's statments go like this (and where I am wrong please correct): There were 133 samples taken from the flat, 89 of those from Meredith's room. Only one from the flat had the DNA of Sollecito (a cigarette butt with the shared DNA of Knox and Sollecito) and the inside the room the bra clasp with the mixture DNA of Meredith and Sollecito. If contamination comes from dust well dust is everywhere and Sollecito's DNA did not turn up anywhere else except on those two items. If contamination occurred from the cigarette butt to bra clasp well Knox's DNA was not on the bra clasp. And collection of these two items and testing were many days apart.

Whether this is sound science or not remains to be debated. I am trying to read more about Tagliabracci's deposition in court today but the headlines are mainly concentrating on Novelli and no contamination. I am sure they will be updated later with more information on Tagliabracci's answers in court.

-

CH,

I'm wondering if they put the bra clasp in the freezer also, being as Raffaele was over there a night or two before the murder cooking up a meal for the roommates and probably might have grabbed some ice out of the freezer, and it is quite possible some of his DNA got on the bag, and if they didn't change gloves when they opened, and then removed the bra clasp... transfer could have happened then.

Just a theory of mine, but there is also the theory floated here in this forum that before trying to bust into Meredith's room, Sollecito tried the door knob and got his DNA on that and it was possible it got transferred then when they went to get the bra clasp --what with everyone touching it back and forth in the video. Did they keep the door closed or open those 46 days?

That's another theory, and just an aside, a good percentage of the dust in anyone's house are dead skin cells which have DNA,

Dave

ETA: not to mention the "gift-wrapped" mop video. The mop is (if I recall correctly) or was originally from Raffaele's apt.

 

[Caper]

-

...the lower the amount of DNA found, the greater the care needed to (collect and store) and the more precise the techniques needed in evaluating them which is why a different (and tougher) certification standard is needed for this type of work.

As an aside, it doesn't help when there are so many other alleles that you can pick and chose which ones to use as a profile match. So many so that you might even be able to connect up the sitting judge with the evidence. That's not a good thing,


Dave

Ok... that's what I was getting at in my above question. Basically what I am asking is..... Is it possible (even likely) that Amanda's boyfriends DNA was never there in the 1st place. Rather....and this is for lack of a better metaphor.... the prosecution simply looked at a starry sky and managed to connect the dots to draw a happy face?

 

[JREF2010]

From what I understand, the answer to what you asked is: The clasp was collected in a questionable manner, not because of the time it sat in the cottage, but because during that time, it was not secure, it got pushed around the floor, and was under a pile of stuff, was likely stepped on, etc. (it moved a few feet from where it was originally found, and the room was trashed).

C&V are saying there are so many DNA profiles on it, most of them partial, that it is impossible to tell for sure who they are from, or how they got there. They are saying that someone (in this case, Stefanoni) can cherry pick which alleles to match up, and that it is possible in that way to match Sollecito, but she could also have matched a series of other people. The only clear, full profile on the clasp is that of Meredith Kercher.

Other JREFers, please correct me if I am wrong on this.

My view is the same.

 

[Justinian2]

From the ASAP news network, "The prosecution today called Giuseppe Novelli, an expert on human genetics at Rome’s Tor Vergata University, to bolster its case against Knox and Sollecito. Novelli said he reviewed the prosecution’s procedures and he 'absolutely excludes' contamination on the knife and bra clasp.

'If the origin and vehicle of contamination is not proved, this is just a hypothetical theory,' Novelli said, adding that panel of experts did not state precisely how the two items may have been contaminated with DNA."
This is grade A bologna from someone who should know better. With respect to Profile N that I discussed earlier, the laboratory manager said, "No direct evidence of either accidental or deliberate contamination has come to light. Existing facilities and protocols were shown to meet independent quality audit requirements." The take home message is that one can follow protocols and one can fail to see where contamination happens, but sometimes it still does.

Novelli is giving his expert opinion on the law, eh? Ya, like that's his area of competence.

In a lab where each of Meredith's DNA molecules gets copied 128 million times, cut apart, and mixed with other snipits of other DNA and plastered all over the lab and the results of any test are supposed to be significant?

 

[AmyStrange]

Ok... that's what I was getting at in my above question. Basically what I am asking is..... Is it possible (even likely) that Amanda's boyfriends DNA was never there in the 1st place. Rather....and this is for lack of a better metaphor.... the prosecution simply looked at a starry sky and managed to connect the dots to draw a happy face?

-

Good metaphor actually. It isn't an absolute, but there is a good probability that's what happened, in my opinion anyway.

But also, with all the other alleles (they are "kind of like" points used to match fingerprints) found on the clasp and with it being such a small amount on a tiny metal part of the clasp and no other match anywhere else on the bra or in the room, makes it an even higher probability that's what happened, but once again this is just my opinion,

Dave

 

[charlatan]

Other JREFers, please correct me if I am wrong on this.

I would take it a step further and argue that the bra clasp itself is evidence of contamination. It wasn't properly stored, thus preventing retesting. It was moved during the two weeks it remained at the crime scene, a time during which the investigators cannot fully account for their comings and goings. We know gloves and booties were not consistently changed during evidence collection. And finally, additional contributors were found that match an arbitrary number of genetic profiles, as one might expect from a contaminated item.

Based on the last round of testimony, Judge Hellmann appears to agree that contamination may have occurred before evidence reached the lab. I find it telling that the prosecution is arguing about lab work rather than the sloppy work that was performed at the crime scene.

 

[Mary_H]

Mary

Not sure how many different ways I can state my opinion. However, if one accepts the principal that Raffaele and Amanda’s families have right to speak to media about their perspective of Meredith Kercher’s murder then the same should apply to the Kercher family.

The observation that only the Kercher family are trying to influence the appeal or the original trial, is frankly absurd all the families directly involved have to a varying degree spoken to the media. We may or may not agree with what they say but they have in my opinion equal rights to free speech; I am not aware of any neutral evidence that supports the view any of the families public statements influenced the jury in the first trial.

What is the difference between Amanda’s family appearing on the Oprah Winfrey talk show in the US and John Kercher writing in UK’s Sunday Times; what is the difference between Amanda’s family taking their Italian legal team’s advice and Meredith’s family doing the same? Now you may disagree with Maresca or John and Stephanie Kercher but this in my opinion is a separate issue.

It seems like you are saying it is okay for one family to speak to media give TV interviews etc., to take legal advice from their counsel but it’s not acceptable that another family does exactly the same.

I agree with you in principle. As you say, both families do have the right to speak to the media about their perspectives. The question is whether the Kerchers are divulging their true perspective.

The Kerchers don't know what happened the night of the murder. They don't know for certain whether Amanda was involved, therefore, they don't have the right to insist she was.

The only truth the Kerchers can be 100% sure about is the truth of their own experience -- that they have been through hell; that it is horrible beyond words to lose a daughter and a sister to murder; that these last four years have been the worst of their lives.

In my opinion, they would make more progress both personally and publicly if they focused on their pain instead of on Amanda.

(P.S. Kudos to Diocletus, bri1 and halides1 for their excellent responses to Coulsdon's question.)

 

[Diocletus]

I find it telling that the prosecution is arguing about lab work rather than the sloppy work that was performed at the crime scene.

This is a very good observation. It's almost like the prosecution has thrown in the towel on this issue of pre-lab contamination, and the whole proceeding has turned into an effort to protect the reputation of Stefanoni/the Scientific Police. In other words, they're throwing the cops under the bus in order to save the lab. Nice.

 

[AmyStrange]

That is so true...

I agree with you in principle. As you say, both families do have the right to speak to the media about their perspectives. The question is whether the Kerchers are divulging their true perspective.

The Kerchers don't know what happened the night of the murder. They don't know for certain whether Amanda was involved, therefore, they don't have the right to insist she was.

The only truth the Kerchers can be 100% sure about is the truth of their own experience -- that they have been through hell; that it is horrible beyond words to lose a daughter and a sister to murder; that these last four years have been the worst of their lives.

In my opinion, they would make more progress both personally and publicly if they focused on their pain instead of on Amanda.

-

Mary

and well said by the way, but instead they are focusing their pain on Amanda and their anger also (and most people would be surprised to find out that they also feel guilt for what happened), but because of the horror they have been through, I'm more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt here. Are they right in what they say and do? I can't answer that until I've actually been in their shoes. Anger and sadness and guilt can make you do strange things and I will not sit in an Ivory tower and judge them. But that is me and my opinion only.

But that also should apply to Amanda and Raffaele's parents also. They are going through a different kind of hell and no one should sit in any high tower and condemn them either until they've walked in their shoes also.

Dave

 

[Fine]

-

CH,

I'm wondering if they put the bra clasp in the freezer also, being as Raffaele was over there a night or two before the murder cooking up a meal for the roommates and probably might have grabbed some ice out of the freezer, and it is quite possible some of his DNA got on the bag, and if they didn't change gloves when they opened, and then removed the bra clasp... transfer could have happened then.

__________________

Amy,

Does it matter whether the bra clasp was put in the freezer? Given the lackadaisical manner in which the forensic police changed their gloves---whenever they felt like it---during their November visit to the cottage whatever substance was on the freezer door handle could have found its way into Meredith's bedroom.

In wonder. Has anyone even acknowledged that the bra clasp was touched when it was discovered on November 3rd?

///

 

[Chris_Halkides]

mix 'n match

The New Scientist reported:
Quote
Mixed-up DNA from crime scenes already causes headaches for analysts; now it seems it can even be difficult to tell how many people's DNA is present in a sample.

Dan Krane of Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio, and his team took 959 full DNA profiles and modelled all the possible three and four-person mixtures that could arise from them. They found that 3 per cent of three-person mixtures could be mistaken for those of two people, and more than 70 per cent of four-person mixtures could be mistaken for two or three-person mixtures (Journal of Forensic Sciences, DOI: 10.1520/JFS2004475).

"If you can't determine how many contributors there were, it is ludicrous to suggest that you can tease apart who those contributors were or what their DNA profiles were," says Krane.
Endquote
This article also touches upon forensic bias. I believe that LondonJohn originally brought this article to everyone's attention.

 

[MiloMinderbinder]

DNA mixtures are difficult to analyze. Meredith's profile is not difficult to match from a mixture on the bra clasp and Sollecito's profile was expanded to the Y-haplotype test which is not definitive, however, I'm fairly certain Vecchiotti's profile would not match the Y-haplotype .

Stefanoni's and Novelli's statments go like this (and where I am wrong please correct): There were 133 samples taken from the flat, 89 of those from Meredith's room. Only one from the flat had the DNA of Sollecito (a cigarette butt with the shared DNA of Knox and Sollecito) and the inside the room the bra clasp with the mixture DNA of Meredith and Sollecito. If contamination comes from dust well dust is everywhere and Sollecito's DNA did not turn up anywhere else except on those two items. If contamination occurred from the cigarette butt to bra clasp well Knox's DNA was not on the bra clasp. And collection of these two items and testing were many days apart.

Whether this is sound science or not remains to be debated. I am trying to read more about Tagliabracci's deposition in court today but the headlines are mainly concentrating on Novelli and no contamination. I am sure they will be updated later with more information on Tagliabracci's answers in court.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the recent testimony concluded that the non-MK DNA on the bra clasp was impossible to definitively identify, i.e., that it might belong to RS or a very large group of other people. The possibility of contamination is a different (and further damning for the prosecution) issue, no?

 

[AmyStrange]

That depends...

-

Amy,

Does it matter whether the bra clasp was put in the freezer? Given the lackadaisical manner in which the forensic police changed their gloves---whenever they felt like it---during their November visit to the cottage whatever substance was on the freezer door handle could have found its way into Meredith's bedroom.

In wonder. Has anyone even acknowledged that the bra clasp was touched when it was discovered on November 3rd?

-

Fine,

on what is being accomplished by asking about the freezer.

Myself, I'm asking because I'm just trying to come up with scenarios as to how Raffaele's DNA (y-halotype specifically) got on the bra clasp and no where else in Meredith's room. The prosecution ask a valid question, and I am just trying to supply possible scenarios. It's a form of mental gymnastics.

I believe the bra clasp evidence should be tossed because there is enough circumstantal evidence to make it unreliable, but the question does still remain. Where did his y-halotype come from?

A lot of people here say we (the pro-Amanda and Raffaele people here in this forum) are better than the pro-guilters because we don't just accept the evidence (and the Massei report) as fact. We critically examine it and hold it up to the light and analyze all of it.

Well a nagging question I've always had is how did Raffaele's y-halotype get on the bra clasp and where did it come from? These are valid questions the prosecution has and I think the scenarios I've written about in my OP possibly explain it,

Dave

ETA: the freezer scenario comes from the revelation that Dr. S testified that using plastic was ok because they used the victims freezer on November 2nd and 3rd to store evidence before transporting them to Rome

 

[AmyStrange]

Hi Milo...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the recent testimony concluded that the non-MK DNA on the bra clasp was impossible to definitively identify, i.e., that it might belong to RS or a very large group of other people. The possibility of contamination is a different (and further damning for the prosecution) issue, no?

-

I think the testimony actually was that the only "complete" profile found on the bra clasp was Merediths. Everything else was a mixture of many incomplete profiles.

Except that Raffaele's y-halotype was also found in that mixture which (although not absolute) does narrow one of the profiles down to coming from someone from his family, but I could be wrong.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Stefanoni's and Novelli's statments go like this (and where I am wrong please correct): There were 133 samples taken from the flat, 89 of those from Meredith's room. Only one from the flat had the DNA of Sollecito (a cigarette butt with the shared DNA of Knox and Sollecito) and the inside the room the bra clasp with the mixture DNA of Meredith and Sollecito. If contamination comes from dust well dust is everywhere and Sollecito's DNA did not turn up anywhere else except on those two items. If contamination occurred from the cigarette butt to bra clasp well Knox's DNA was not on the bra clasp. And collection of these two items and testing were many days apart.

The obvious that comes to mind is that the contamination most likely occurred by touch transfer during one of the many sloppy searches and rummagings.

I think the "133 samples" argument is misleading and distorts the truth. The important information that it omits is:
How many of those samples gave no results because of incorrect collection/storage/testing?
What was the distribution of those samples and how does it correlate with the areas and items where we would expect to find Raffaele's DNA?

We already know that most of those 133 represent traces taken from exhibits collected in Meredith's room.
We also know that of the few times he was in the cottage, most of the time Raffaele spent in the common area. He cooked and ate in the kitchen and most probably washed hands in the adjacent bathroom. On the morning after the murder he looked around the rooms and tried to force Meredith's door.

Where do we expect to find his DNA? First - On the things he touched - kitchen utensils, bathroom faucet, doors, door handles, ETA: the refrigerator . Second - on the used clothing and underwear that Amanda left in her room.
Was any of those sampled for DNA?
Lets take for example the kitchen/living-room. According to the index of evidence only the cigarette butts and samples of presumed blood from the floor were collected.
From the large bathroom - only the feces, dirty toilet paper and contents of the washing machine.

From Amanda's room - again "presumed blood" from various surfaces plus a pair of socks (!).

Basically, the things they decided to test outside of the murder room were very unlikely to have Raffaele's DNA and there were things they left behind that very likely had his DNA.



Looking at the index of evidence the question appears how did Comodi and Steffi arrive at the number 133? Obviously some exhibits were sampled in multiple spots, but it's still hard to come up with the 133 - 89 = 44 samples just from the upstairs flat. To me it looks like 133 is a total number from Via della Pergola, including downstairs flat and trash found around the house.

 

[Ammonitida]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the recent testimony concluded that the non-MK DNA on the bra clasp was impossible to definitively identify, i.e., that it might belong to RS or a very large group of other people. The possibility of contamination is a different (and further damning for the prosecution) issue, no?

It's a different issue. The Y-Haplotype, which is different from the DNA typing that you mention, appears to be compatible with Sollecito's DNA as well, but I'm not sure how strong this is. Whatever the case, contamination HAS been proven in the form of at least 17 different genetic profiles being found on the bra clasp. Clearly this bra clasp made its way to dusty places where DNA donors were found in abundance -- places where the other 90+ items taken from Kercher's room had never been to apparently.

The 17 profiles combined with the fact that there is no other tangible evidence that Sollecito was involved in the murder strongly indicates contamination.

 

[charlatan]

Except that Raffaele's y-halotype was also found in that mixture which (although not absolute) does narrow one of the profiles down to coming from someone from his family, but I could be wrong.

My interpretation of yesterday's statement was that the presence of Raffaele's profile on the clasp has no significance because an arbitrary number of profiles can be constructed from the data. The original report only alluded to this critical point. C&V are arguing that what investigators interpreted as signal should have been interpreted as noise.

 

[Ammonitida]

-

I think the testimony actually was that the only "complete" profile found on the bra clasp was Merediths. Everything else was a mixture of many incomplete profiles.

Except that Raffaele's y-halotype was also found in that mixture which (although not absolute) does narrow one of the profiles down to coming from someone from his family, but I could be wrong.

Haplotype as in the western European R1b for example? Or is it something more exclusive?