Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[Mary_H]

Kaosium,

So it comes down to a claim that Stefanoni is/was lying? This still feels like the same argument from 2009.

Maybe Mignini convinced her that finding Meredith's DNA on the knife was for the greater good. Not everything that is true can be proven, he might say. So, pareidolia? Yes.

 

[shuttlt]

Maybe Mignini convinced her that finding Meredith's DNA on the knife was for the greater good. Not everything that is true can be proven, he might say. So, pareidolia? Yes.

I don't think that would be pareidolia.

 

[RoseMontague]

Again, this is reasoning backwards from knowing the knife isn't the murder weapon. This argument doesn't seem to have changed much since 2009. I genuinely fail to see why it is significantly more or less in the trash can now than it was previously.

If the machine was cleaned after testing 6 minutes later either the DNA is still in the machine or it is not. The same with the area she used to prepare the sample and the equipment she used to test it, including the machine itself. 12 days later that DNA is either still there or it isn't. The gap makes no difference, to me what would make a difference is knowing the machine and other equipment used was cleaned after testing other samples not related to the case 5 more times during that gap.

Folk have been hanging on to this gap like it is a life preserver thrown to them from a sinking ship based on a quote from a few news reports at the end of the 30 July hearing. I have a feeling the transcripts might shed some light on exactly what was asked, answered, admitted and/or conceded.

I do know from my review of the test results and the SAL reports that there is a gap with a handful of items that are still not dated that I doubt were tested during the gap simply based on the lack of dates of testing of the majority of other items during that gap. Without knowing a lot more information the gap in and of itself is not significant.

I believe that C&V are thinking there was quite possibly some funny business going on with the test results on this knife, and it would not surprise me if the judge has the same feeling and Rose probably has a similar opinion as well. There are many red flags on this.

 

[Mary_H]

Kaosium,

So it comes down to a claim that Stefanoni is/was lying? This still feels like the same argument from 2009.

By the way, everything that was true in 2009 is still true today. Apropos of Bruce's comment above, it is disheartening to see reporters act as if something has been newly discovered about the evidence, as if thousands of people didn't already know that the knife and bra clasp were bogus until the media told them so this week.

 

[Katody Matrass]

I guess so. Is there any reason to believe it couldn't have gotten dirty between the murder and collection?

I guess there is because even the prosecution didn't try such an argument.

It's been agreed for ages that there is no detectable blood or flesh, this doesn't strike me as new.

The thing is no one bothered to check it before.

More important thing is Stefi didn't test the crevice between the blade and the handle. C&V found accumulated starch there. It is quite absorptive, yet it had no blood at all.
The idea that they cleaned it all perfectly, then used the knife for few days to get it dirty again, yet there still were a few non-blood cells that managed to survive all of it just in the middle of the blade is very improbable.

 

[shuttlt]

If the machine was cleaned after testing 6 minutes later either the DNA is still in the machine or it is not. The same with the area she used to prepare the sample and the equipment she used to test it, including the machine itself. 12 days later that DNA is either still there or it isn't. The gap makes no difference, to me what would make a difference is knowing the machine and other equipment used was cleaned after testing other samples not related to the case 5 more times during that gap.

Oh, most certainly.

Folk have been hanging on to this gap like it is a life preserver thrown to them from a sinking ship based on a quote from a few news reports at the end of the 30 July hearing. I have a feeling the transcripts might shed some light on exactly what was asked, answered, admitted and/or conceded.

It would be nice to see a transcript. We so rarely get to see them. I've been asking around for transcripts from the original trial, particularly Stef's testimony since the end of the first trial. Three days of testimony as I recall and we have a couple of half remembered paragraphs. It's a pity. I'm sure many of my questions would have been answered by them.

I believe that C&V are thinking there was quite possibly some funny business going on with the test results on this knife, and it would not surprise me if the judge has the same feeling and Rose probably has a similar opinion as well. There are many red flags on this.

Sure. If the judge believes there was "funny business" the knife is gone.

 

[shuttlt]

I guess there is because even the prosecution didn't try such an argument.

Have you got the transcript?

The thing is no one bothered to check it before.

More important thing is Stefi didn't test the crevice between the blade and the handle. C&V found accumulated starch there. It is quite absorptive, yet it had no blood at all.
The idea that they cleaned it all perfectly, then used the knife for few days to get it dirty again, yet there still were a few non-blood cells that managed to survive all of it just in the middle of the blade is very improbable.

I agree.

 

[Kaosium]

Kaosium,

So it comes down to a claim that Stefanoni is/was lying? This still feels like the same argument from 2009.

Shuttlt they were just as innocent in 2009 as they were in 2007 and they are now. You shouldn't have believed it (at least the knife for crissakes) in 2009, I can't understand why anyone did. I still argue with them though, just like I argued with my best friend from childhood about the existence of Atlantis for 15 years. I believed it too when I was a kid, then I got educated. I gave it to him both barrels, Plato, analogies, Cayce, seances, the whole nine yards. We had to finally agree that since I couldn't tell him with any certainty what the world was like 12k years ago (but there was no Athens goddammit, sure people lived there but it wasn't Athens! ) and I'd never accept 'evidence' from seances, that we'd just let it die. Off and on, while we went different ways of course, but when we got together it came up, until finally we agreed to disagree.

Shuttlt, it doesn't come down to 'Stefanoni's word' it comes down to the fact every single possible falsifier proves that knife wasn't involved in the murder. DNA, or no DNA. There's a better chance Atlantis existed as per the stories of Cayce than that knife left the drawer. All we have from 9500 bc or whenever it was is stones and bones, not so much in the way of falsifiers. With that knife we have every falsifier you could ask for.

 

[shuttlt]

Shuttlt they were just as innocent in 2009 as they were in 2007 and they are now. You shouldn't have believed it (at least the knife for crissakes) in 2009, I can't understand why anyone did. I still argue with them though, just like I argued with my best friend from childhood about the existence of Atlantis for 15 years. I believed it too when I was a kid, then I got educated. I gave it to him both barrels, Plato, analogies, Cayce, seances, the whole nine yards. We had to finally agree that since I couldn't tell him with any certainty what the world was like 12k years ago (but there was no Athens goddammit, sure people lived there but it wasn't Athens! ) and I'd never accept 'evidence' from seances, that we'd just let it die. Off and on, while we went different ways of course, but when we got together it came up, until finally we agreed to disagree.

I've never strongly believed or disbelieved in the knife. I've disagreed with a bunch of arguments against it - like the one about Amanda touching Meredith, or possibly a door handle and then tracking the DNA back to Raffaele's and then it getting onto the knife.

Shuttlt, it doesn't come down to 'Stefanoni's word' it comes down to the fact every single possible falsifier proves that knife wasn't involved in the murder. DNA, or no DNA. There's a better chance Atlantis existed as per the stories of Cayce than that knife left the drawer. All we have from 9500 bc or whenever it was is stones and bones, not so much in the way of falsifiers. With that knife we have every falsifier you could ask for.

So nothing significant has changed since the first trial with respect to the knife except the judge? The reasons for disbelieving it are the same as always?

I don't mean this to come across overly dismissive. Many of the cases cited by Halides come down to contamination being proved because it's overwhelmingly demonstrated that that is the only possibility.

 

[RoseMontague]

Tonight, Anderson Cooper asked Curt Knox how this all could have happened and how it has been able to go on for so long, if the prosecution really has no case. Meanwhile, this guy, whom halides1 cited earlier today, wrote, "And certainly, if the Italian authorities were careful, dastardly planners they would have been more circumspect about releasing photos of dirty rubber gloves handling the bra clasp of the decedent."

It strikes me how difficult it is going to be, once Amanda and Raffaele are freed, to give short answers to these kinds of questions and respond to this type of disbelief, which most of us still share. Those who are just waking up to the case don't realize that dissecting the components of this perfect storm has taken up hours of research, analysis and writing over three-plus years for many people. And we STILL don't get how in the world the Perugian police thought they could get away with it!

Good point. These people are used to having their work accepted as brilliant, without questioning. And most of them are idiots. Idiots that received medals for their brilliant work. Pay no attention to the biologist behind the curtain. That letter from the important police dude talking about how great the forensic people are shows you just how self deluded these morons are.

 

[Kaosium]

I've never strongly believed or disbelieved in the knife. I've disagreed with a bunch of arguments against it - like the one about Amanda touching Meredith, or possibly a door handle and then tracking the DNA back to Raffaele's and then it getting onto the knife.

Hrm. Let me try this then: outside Mignini and Comodi saying so there was no reason to think that knife was used in the murder. What's their job? To put Amanda and Raffaele away for life, thus why did you believe them without any proof?

So nothing significant has changed since the first trial with respect to the knife except the judge? The reasons for disbelieving it are the same as always?

Not exactly, now it has been determined there never was any DNA on the knife, something that should have happened during the first trial but was refused.

I don't mean this to come across overly dismissive. Many of the cases cited by Halides come down to contamination being proved because it's overwhelmingly demonstrated that that is the only possibility.

Who cares where it came from if it doesn't exist?

 

[Kaosium]

Tonight, Anderson Cooper asked Curt Knox how this all could have happened and how it has been able to go on for so long, if the prosecution really has no case. Meanwhile, this guy, whom halides1 cited earlier today, wrote, "And certainly, if the Italian authorities were careful, dastardly planners they would have been more circumspect about releasing photos of dirty rubber gloves handling the bra clasp of the decedent."

It strikes me how difficult it is going to be, once Amanda and Raffaele are freed, to give short answers to these kinds of questions and respond to this type of disbelief, which most of us still share. Those who are just waking up to the case don't realize that dissecting the components of this perfect storm has taken up hours of research, analysis and writing over three-plus years for many people. And we STILL don't get how in the world the Perugian police thought they could get away with it!

My ears were buzzing when I figured it out, all the time thinking to myself, 'how on earth did they ever think they could get away with this?' It just so happened at the same time I was coming back from my brother's production of 'The Crucible' every night, and that was kinda like...spooky dude. I'll tell you right now the ones who think they were all on drugs, the 'ergot' theory or whatever it was, they're wrong. People really are that paranoid, absurd and cruel sometimes, they don't need drugs. Heh, I've thought of this little speech reading about this case, but I'd forgotten the closing words, spooky, huh?

 

[shuttlt]

Hrm. Let me try this then: outside Mignini and Comodi saying so there was no reason to think that knife was used in the murder. What's their job? To put Amanda and Raffaele away for life, thus why did you believe them without any proof?

What proof can there ever be if you take the view that they would probably fabricate evidence if they needed to?

Not exactly, now it has been determined there never was any DNA on the knife, something that should have happened during the first trial but was refused.

How has this been determined? Do you mean the starch?

 

[RoseMontague]

Oh, most certainly.


It would be nice to see a transcript. We so rarely get to see them. I've been asking around for transcripts from the original trial, particularly Stef's testimony since the end of the first trial. Three days of testimony as I recall and we have a couple of half remembered paragraphs. It's a pity. I'm sure many of my questions would have been answered by them.


Sure. If the judge believes there was "funny business" the knife is gone.

Google translation

 

[Teddy2007]

Why did they choose that knife from Sollecito's kitchen? Did they test all the knives in that drawer, or was that the only knife? The apparent random selection of that knife, and the incredibly low level non-blood DNA detected (but no mention of the starch) for me is a smoking gun that we have a problem with the integrity of the prosecution.

 

[shuttlt]

Google translation

Yay! Thankyou Rose. When did that surface?

 

[shuttlt]

Why did they choose that knife from Sollecito's kitchen? Did they test all the knives in that drawer, or was that the only knife? The apparent random selection of that knife, and the incredibly low level non-blood DNA detected (but no mention of the starch) for me is a smoking gun that we have a problem with the integrity of the prosecution.

This is an old question. It kicked around for ages until Charlie produced a photo of the drawer. It was the only sharp knife in it. There could have been other knives elsewhere of course, but not in the drawer.

 

[RoseMontague]

Why did they choose that knife from Sollecito's kitchen? Did they test all the knives in that drawer, or was that the only knife? The apparent random selection of that knife, and the incredibly low level non-blood DNA detected (but no mention of the starch) for me is a smoking gun that we have a problem with the integrity of the prosecution.

2 of Raffaele's small knives and item 36. A similar knife to item 36 (looks nice and shiny) on top of Amanda's sink was not tested.

 

[Kaosium]

What proof can there ever be if you take the view that they would probably fabricate evidence if they needed to?

If they don't produce proof to back their contentions, you dismiss them. If the 'proof' looks fishy, you dismiss it. If they were last seen digging up bodies checking pants sizes and haircuts, starting investigations and charging everyone who got in their way, some two dozen or so, and were disciplined for it, and they start coming up with more nutty theories and charging or starting investigations on twenty more, you dismiss them as nutters.

How has this been determined?

That's what the conclusion of the independent experts was. I link it for your perusal, again.http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/contents/conclusions-2/ They decided <Dr. Stefanoni misused her microscope so they took away her certification for the procedure, and that's all there ever was. How do you suppose it was ever determined to be there? Just reverse that.

That's what all the fuss was about yesterday, the threats, the calunnia from Comodi, there's no DNA on either, there never was.

Regarding the starch, that was a part of it, it showed the knife had never been cleaned and had never seen blood, they also determined there was no cellular residue. They also backed basically every single contention of the defense from 2009 and before. It never should have been produced as evidence of murder, it was 'shock and awe' not just 'contamination,' that was just one facet.

 

[RoseMontague]

Yay! Thankyou Rose. When did that surface?

Many of them are starting to come, komponisto is heading up a translation project. I hope we will see all of this eventually.