Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

[shuttlt]

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

It's frustrating as all hell that they've been sat on all this time. I'm grateful to the translators that this is now being done.

Do you now have visibility of the full case file, or has that still only been seen by Dr Waterbury and a handful of others?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

taking the starch out of Mignini's shirt

Kaosium,

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

shuttlt,

The starch is problematic for the prosecution. Carlo Torre (IIRC from Perugia Shock) thinks it would have trapped blood, for one thing.

 

[shuttlt]

shuttlt,

The starch is problematic for the prosecution. Carlo Torre (IIRC from Perugia Shock) thinks it would have trapped blood, for one thing.

I understand this argument. It still comes down to believing that Stef was lying though, surely? If the contamination can't have happened at the lab (6 days etc..), or at collection, then I guess it might have happened accidentally at the police station, but really, lying about procedures in the lab seems the most likely to me.

 

[RoseMontague]

It's frustrating as all hell that they've been sat on all this time. I'm grateful to the translators that this is now being done.

Do you now have visibility of the full case file, or has that still only been seen by Dr Waterbury and a handful of others?

Nope, I only have a few of the transcripts. I like them to come out as well. Here is the one following the last one, I'll try to give you the entire day (Google translation)

 

[shuttlt]

Nope, I only have a few of the transcripts. I like them to come out as well. Here is the one following the last one, I'll try to give you the entire day (Google translation)

Much appreciated. It's refreshing to have the material handed over so readily.

 

[billyryan]

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!

I will tell you why Mary this case is par for the course in Italy,in an Italian court room the facts are what the prosecutor says they are,lawyers and defendants and their families are to intimidated to protest and anyway no newspaper or tv station would report their objections calumnia charges are the method the bullies use to get their way
Anderson Cooper might have asked Mignini how did the tried and tested methods to convict innocent people fail in this case,it is as Frank and Rose reports business as usual in the Sabrina Misseri case,Mignini's answer would be something along the lines of (the calumnia charges proved very ineffective against Amanda Knox's American supporters)
Some people want to believe this case is just a blip in a modern justice system,I think they are wrong,being innocent in an Italian courtroom won't save you,I will watch with interest as the Italian economy slips dangerously close to bankruptcy what effect this case will have on their tourist industry,I have no doubt that the injustice visited on the two innocent students is far from unusual in Italy,like I have no doubt that the prosecutors the police and the cowardly judges involved in this case knew they were persecuting innocent people

 

[Kaosium]

I understand this argument. It still comes down to believing that Stef was lying though, surely? If the contamination can't have happened at the lab (6 days etc..), or at collection,

What makes you think either of those things are true? The court appointed experts didn't come to that conclusion.

then I guess it might have happened accidentally at the police station, but really, lying about procedures in the lab seems the most likely to me.

That certainly is another likelihood, when you get at minimum four profiles on a tiny clasp like that on an item that doesn't see much handling anyway, more than one thing could have happened.

 

[shuttlt]

What makes you think either of those things are true? The court appointed experts didn't come to that conclusion.

I thought they had said 6 days was "enough". Anyway, what would be the source of contamination during collection?

That certainly is another likelihood, when you get at minimum four profiles on a tiny clasp like that on an item that doesn't see much handling anyway, more than one thing could have happened.

It's confusing to move to the clasp mid-discussion. Different arguments clearly apply to that than to the knife.

 

[Kaosium]

I thought they had said 6 days was "enough". Anyway, what would be the source of contamination during collection?

What makes you think it happened that way? I missed the confirmation of that claim, what was the context? What makes you think any prosecution arguments were accepted by the court after their demand for new experts was rejected? Why would the prosecution demand new experts if they felt their arguments were accepted? Why would Comodi be threatening witnesses and charging the judges were biased against them and they would walk?

The source could have been the collector, the collection method, the transfer or the laboratory. The report was damning in that regard:

- it does not appear that inspection procedures were carried out according to international protocols in order to minimize environmental contamination;

- international protocols of collection and sampling of the item were not applied in order to minimize contamination from handling;

- it is not known whether rigorous decontamination procedures were applied in the laboratory to minimize laboratory contamination;

It's confusing to move to the clasp mid-discussion. Different arguments clearly apply to that than to the knife.

I'm just kinda trying to figure out why you're arguing either!

Basically all of the innocentisti arguments were validated, do want to track down which one was the most convincing to the experts? Is there a prize for that one?

 

[shuttlt]

What makes you think it happened that way? I missed the confirmation of that claim, what was the context? What makes you think any prosecution arguments were accepted by the court after their demand for new experts was rejected? Why would the prosecution demand new experts if they felt their arguments were accepted? Why would Comodi be threatening witnesses and charging the judges were biased against them and they would walk?

Who can say.

The source could have been the collector,

How?

the collection method,

How?

the transfer

Possibly.

or the laboratory.

I'll sit quietly and wait quietly in the hope of clarification about the six day claim. If it's true that nothing had been tested relating to the case in the machine any time recently and its a busy lab with other stuff being tested in the meantime, I really don't see how contamination could have occurred. One can never know for sure, but it doesn't seem very likely.

I'm just kinda trying to figure out why you're arguing either!

Basically all of the innocentisti arguments were validated, do want to track down which one was the most convincing to the experts? Is there a prize for that one?

No, the starch thing looks like the best one. Aside from that there's the question of the 6 days that, for me, would be nice to clarify. I don't buy the odds of a false match with being 100 million to one or what ever it may be, human fallability brings it well within the range of the plausible.

I don't altogether see what retesting the knife would prove though. If Meredith's profile was found we'd still be having the same argument about starch and contamination.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

2009 versus 2011

I understand this argument. It still comes down to believing that Stef was lying though, surely? If the contamination can't have happened at the lab (6 days etc..), or at collection, then I guess it might have happened accidentally at the police station, but really, lying about procedures in the lab seems the most likely to me.

shuttlt,

Do you mean Ms. Stefanoni possibly lying about there being a period of six days, or do you mean something else? If the question is what has changed since 2009, then I would say the starch and some more information about collection. There are probably other things, but they are not coming to me at the moment. However, one important difference is who is saying them. Some guy named halides1 saying that peaks of 20-50 RFU are dubious does not carry a good deal of weight, but when Conti and Vecchiotti make a similar argument, it does.

Then there is the question of how the profile itself was generated. I don't think that a period of six days, whether or not it is true, means very much. As long as evidence from Meredith was in the laboratory, that would remain one possible route of contamination. One way in which the knife might have become contaminated is from Officer Gubbiotti, who was at the girls' flat and who was the second person to handle the knife. I recently provided some citations that reiterate that low template DNA is more prone to contamination than standard DNA profiling. For these reasons I favor contamination over evidence-tampering or secondary transfer as the origin of the profile. However, it is necessarily speculative.

 

[JREF2010]

Out of curiosity, how do people feel Meredith's DNA profile came to be found on the knife?

for me it was in the tool.

had she not magnified the chart to blow up the size of the 12 and 20RFU peaks to appear large, the chart would not have shown anything but a flat line.

if there is in fact neg and pos controls, for that time frame proving the tool was clean, then I would admit my view is incorrect.

If Stefanoni had magnified all the DNA charts to study the garbage range of 0RFU to 30RFU for example, then we probably would se a lot more....er ...garbage and noise in the charts.

Its this simple reason the Applied BioSystem manufacturer states the RFU minimum levels, and below that minimal level are not reliable and can be contamination in the tool or noise.

 

[shuttlt]

shuttlt,

Do you mean Ms. Stefanoni possibly lying about there being a period of six days, or do you mean something else?

If she says that procedures in the lab were such that contamination can't account for the LCN results, and yet we are convinvinced that such contamination did occure in the lab, then she must be lying.

If the question is what has changed since 2009, then I would say the starch and some more information about collection.

In relation to the knife? I don't see how anything could have accidentally contaminated the knife with Meredith's DNA during collection. Am I missing something significant.

There are probably other things, but they are not coming to me at the moment. However, one important difference is who is saying them. Some guy named halides1 saying that peaks of 20-50 RFU are dubious does not carry a good deal of weight, but when Conti and Vecchiotti make a similar argument, it does.

There's no question it carries more weight. At the very least the argument for contamination must have enough plausibility that a couple of experts are prepared to put their names to it under oath. I don't want to diminish the significance of that. I'm far more comfortable with all your old arguments now that that has happened.

Then there is the question of how the profile itself was generated. I don't think that a period of six days, whether or not it is true, means very much. As long as evidence from Meredith was in the laboratory, that would remain one possible route of contamination. One way in which the knife might have become contaminated is from Officer Gubbiotti, who was at the girls' flat and who was the second person to handle the knife. I recently provided some citations that reiterate that low template DNA is more prone to contamination than standard DNA profiling. For these reasons I favor contamination over evidence-tampering or secondary transfer as the origin of the profile. However, it is necessarily speculative.

For myself, assuming that the knife isn't involved in the murder, I'd now go with lab contamination and Stef lying about procedures. I just don't like the idea of somebody wandering about carrying an uncontaminated secondary transfer bit of Meredith's DNA about the place and then transferring it, again uncontaminated by anything else, onto the knife. It's a more extreme version of the "what are the odds" argument about the dust and the bra clasp. I guess I could accept it if all other possibilities were ruled out, but I'd be happier with the knife being the murder weapon and the blood never having made it to the starch at the base of the handle.

What is the mechanism by which we think this sample got onto the knife/lab equipment if it really was six days? For six days other stuff gets scanned only for them to pull out a Kleenex that they use only for items relating to Meredith and wipe the knife down with that. I'm sorry for being facetious but I struggle to see accidental contamination after six days as remotely likely - if the equipment was in anything like regular use over that period.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi Shuttlt,
A while back,
Rose Montague posted a photograph here in this post I am linking that I found interesting of the gals apartment's sink area.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=7390673#post7390673

It seems to show a large knife handle. Rose asked if that knife was ever tested, it appears not.

If that is a kitchen knife, why wouldn't Amanda and Raffaele, and Rudy have just used that one to murder Meredith?

If that is a large kitchen knife, why wasn't it tested for Meredith's blood also?
Surely it too would have been compatable with the wounds Meredith suffered, as was thought so with that huuuge kitchen knife found in the cutlery drawer at Raffaele's home...

 

[shuttlt]

if there is in fact neg and pos controls, for that time frame proving the tool was clean, then I would admit my view is incorrect.

I agree that this would be important. With that caveat I'm not sure I have much to say against you. Would you also reconsider if it really did turn out that 6 days had elapsed and the equipment had been in regular use throughout with unrelated material?

 

[Grinder]

The biggest difference between 2009 and now is that independent experts have sided with the defense arguments made in the original trial.

The lab didn't have the proper LCN negative pressure, IIRC, ventilation system which would allow DNA to remain in the testing area.

I don't think placing the knife back in the drawer is out-of-the-question much as the Purloined Letter. It also is possible they used it post murder and that's how the starch got on it; however, the point that the additional washing and use would make the residual that much less likely.

I would like to know how many items were tested using the same methodology (LCN) in this case.

Had the experts come back saying the test were well done would you also say nothing changed from 2009?

Of course, all the same arguments remain in place from 2009, such as the question of how the knife was transported without leaving any trace in a bag, but now the independent experts have spoken. Not Reliable.

 

[Swimfish]

for me it was in the tool.

had she not magnified the chart to blow up the size of the 12 and 20RFU peaks to appear large, the chart would not have shown anything but a flat line.

...

If Stefanoni had magnified all the DNA charts to study the garbage range of 0RFU to 30RFU for example, then we probably would se a lot more....er ...garbage and noise in the charts.

Its this simple reason the Applied BioSystem manufacturer states the RFU minimum levels, and below that minimal level are not reliable and can be contamination in the tool or noise.

Talking about contamination is fools errand, as it plays into the the prosecution theory of the DNA being present in a small amount on the knife. I think JREF is getting to the point. The unreliable finding of MK's DNA was false because it was below the noise threshold of the machine.

Correct me if I'm wrong. I think the paper traces only amplify this problem as they only represent a snapshot in time of data points (lines) that are in fact randomly moving up and down. In real time it looks like slow motion waves in choppy water. Having spent a large part of my adult life in anti-submarine work looking for specific line patterns in the grass of oceanic noise, I can tell you that finding and even tracking ghosts happens all the time. Everything looked great until next couple integration passes and your certain contact slowly faded away.

What C&K also said is that MK's DNA trace on the knife is probably a ghost. Ms. Stephi never did the reintegration runs so we will never know if the lines in the noise went back down. From my view point there is no need to show or prove contamination because the DNA traces were most likely never there.

As Amanda can tell you speculating to the prosecutor about the existence of false evidence is never a good idea.

 

[Kaosium]

Who can say.

It forms a pattern to me.

How?

Any DNA withstanding the magic cleaning fluid can be transferred by police on their clothes. Or anything else. It can also probably fly. All of those are more probable than it being on that knife as a result of the murder with all those falsifiers.

Incidentally, if there was DNA that actually came from anywhere but that lab, I was always partial that it was secondary transfer from Amanda wiping it on her sleeve when she put it away, the sleeve having Meredith's DNA as they lived together.

How?


Possibly.

You realize in a trial de novo you have to prove the case again from a standpoint of the presumption of innocence, right? It's your bra clasp now, it no longer has DNA on it, it's your knife, it no longer has DNA on it. Have fun with them at the bottom of the Tiber! I'd wear a thick wetsuit, I hear it's awfully nasty down there!

I'll sit quietly and wait quietly in the hope of clarification about the six day claim. If it's true that nothing had been tested relating to the case in the machine any time recently and its a busy lab with other stuff being tested in the meantime, I really don't see how contamination could have occurred. One can never know for sure, but it doesn't seem very likely.

Shuttlt, I don't get it, no one's going to even try to validate that six day claim, the prosecution brought it up, it was rejected, it's over for the knife and the clasp. What evidence do you have that the bra-clasp and knife have DNA on them? I'm skeptical of that claim!

No, the starch thing looks like the best one. Aside from that there's the question of the 6 days that, for me, would be nice to clarify. I don't buy the odds of a false match with being 100 million to one or what ever it may be, human fallability brings it well within the range of the plausible.

I personally don't think the six day thing had any validity all, it was a rather lame riposte in my opinion.

I don't altogether see what retesting the knife would prove though. If Meredith's profile was found we'd still be having the same argument about starch and contamination.

Neither was ever needed, there were enough falsifiers already. The problem here was the knife and bra clasp never should have been permitted in court in the first place, they were nothing but stinky stains on toilet paper Mignini fished out of <Dr. Stephanoni's toilet. That's what the independent experts said, and in doing so not only invalidated her work on those two items, but also called into question the entirety of the forensics in the case. All of this should have taken place in the Massei Court, it was a waste of everyone's time and Raffaele and Amanda's lives but that's just kinda how they do it in Italy when you get the wrong prosecutor. Their 'evidence' wasn't valid in the first place, it didn't just 'disappear,' it never existed as evidence of murder, it was contrived. Just like the whole case, which never should have seen a courtroom, and has been noted numerous times, never would have in the UK or the US.

Lemme guess, you never did read that report, did you? Things might make more sense if you did.

 

[shuttlt]

The biggest difference between 2009 and now is that independent experts have sided with the defense arguments made in the original trial.

Yes

The lab didn't have the proper LCN negative pressure, IIRC, ventilation system which would allow DNA to remain in the testing area.

This isn't new.

Had the experts come back saying the test were well done would you also say nothing changed from 2009?

I believe I would.

 

[Onofarar]

The liberal thing was at least an issue in the Lacrosse case. Frankly, this is the first I have heard about it being a theme in Amanda's case. I guess her most well known supporter is Donald Trump. What am I missing on this one?

I think the relativly early piece by Tim Egan in favor of AK's innocence which ran in the NY Times maybe at the heart of Coulter's obvious bias in the case. Coulter has a knee-jerk reflex when it comes to the NYT - if they are on one side she MUST be on the other. Too bad her ego won't let her see the truth.