Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Katody Matrass said:
piktor,
first - blood on the bathroom door edge is around knee/trousers level. Look at the photo

second - it is not diluted. There is dark, heavy coagulation at the end of the streak. Another photo - Look for Rep. 9L

This disproves your cleanup/wiping theory.
Interestingly it confirms Guede's story of going to the bathroom with blood on his pants. He brushed his clothing on the edge of the open door, leaving the streak.
Click to expand...


To think! Piktor was quite indignant in his/her assertion that the blood on the bathroom door edge was at shoulder height - and I was stupid enough to take him/her at his/her word! Turns out that this was totally incorrect! thanks for finding a wider-angle photo of the door that shows the actual truth as opposed to an ignorant (but quite assertive) guess. As you say, it's most likely therefore that Guede's right knee had blood on it and that it brushed the edge of the open door as Guede entered the bathroom.

The rest of your points are all valuable and entirely valid as well. What it boils down to is that Piktor's original "argument" on this issue - that the evidence on the two doors somehow proves that Knox/Sollecito engaged in a post-crime clean-up - is entirely bogus and incorrect. I hope that Piktor stops trying to defend the indefensible at this point, and perhaps moves on to trying to find even more increasingly-tenuous ways to "prove" Knox and Sollecito were involved in the murder or clean-up. If so, I look forward to reading and thoroughly debunking each and every one of them.
 
Last edited:
Dear Dog, who cares? If the prosecution uses some of their time to go over blood on the edge of the door whether knee height, shoulder height or eye level, it will never influence the outcome. Please let them make it a centerpiece of their summation.
 
Grinder said:
Dear Dog, who cares? If the prosecution uses some of their time to go over blood on the edge of the door whether knee height, shoulder height or eye level, it will never influence the outcome. Please let them make it a centerpiece of their summation.
Click to expand...


Oh I agree. Let's all hope that this risible "argument" is put to bed for good now: it's worthless. That it is worthless was worth pointing out, though.
 
halides1 said:
Dan O.,

Do you mean B.A. or B.S.?
Click to expand...


If I spelt out what I meant the auto-censor would hit me :D


Actually, the paragraph was from my archive of the Google translated text. The Italian text says "laurea in Scienze Biologiche" and Google now translates this as "graduated in Biological Sciences".
 
Grinder said:
If someone wiped blood off the outside of a door they were locking, that hardly constitutes a cleanup. Once again, what a waste of time arguing over trivia that really doesn't matter.

If there is some minor removal of blood from a door, what does prove?
Click to expand...
Guilt theory requires a miraculous selective cleanup to explain the complete lack of any other bloody footprints or fingerprints while Guede's are numerous.
Guilters seem to irrationally believe that by proposing any kind of clean up they'll jump over that impassable through logic barrier.

Of all of them only Yummi/Machiavelli seemed to understand that huge problem in their theories. IIRC he proposed some very strange explanations. In his opinion AK and RS carefully strewed some rags or towels all over the flat to preserve the barely visible Guede's tracks, while they were running all over the place doing staging.
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Piktor over on .org has come to the conclusion that since there are photos showing two doors in the cottage - the doors to the small bathroom and Meredith's bedroom - with blood on their interior faces and/or edges, but no blood on their exterior faces (i.e. those facing the hallway when the door is shut), this somehow proves that there was a post-crime clean-up. Furthermore, the "argument" states that the "clean-up artist" deliberately cleaned the exterior faces in order to make the doors seem normal when viewed from the hallway if they were closed.
Click to expand...


No blood on the handle :jaw-dropp

Just what do they think this is?
picture.php
 
I just saw a comment that the (possible?) trace of Raffaele on the bra clasp couldn't have been contamination from elsewhere in the flat, because there was no other trace of Raffaele's DNA in the flat.

And he's supposed to have done WHAT in there?

Rolfe.
 
Yes, I know. The kids were in there with swimming caps (whatever happened to that?) and totally naked. They cleaned with magic wipes and the selectomatic DNA vacuum. They then used disappearing powder from their Harry Houdini magic kit to get rid of the wipes and vacuum. Then they used the last of the powder to get rid of the magic kit and all their bloody clothes. But they forgot to use it on the knife so Amanda had a flashback from Eng 102 and remembered the "Purloined Letter" and just put in the drawer after threatening Koko with it.

For them it so sad that they forgot to clean the faucet, sink and the bath mat and only noticed it as they were showing the house to the police.
 
C & V said the bra clasp couldn't be read for anyone but Mez, but they aren't experienced police crime scene investigators, so what do they know? Certainly not as much as a googling poster.
 
Rolfe said:
I just saw a comment that the (possible?) trace of Raffaele on the bra clasp couldn't have been contamination from elsewhere in the flat, because there was no other trace of Raffaele's DNA in the flat.

And he's supposed to have done WHAT in there?

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

It's not entirely true, because there was his DNA on a cigarette butt in the kitchen.
But it is interesting how self defeating this argument is.
Amanda - lived there, her DNA were not surprisingly found in her bathroom, all over her floor, in the kitchen, but luckily not in Meredith's room.
Guede - killed Meredith - his DNA is found in the bathroom he used and in many places in Meredith's room - on her bra, on her purse, on her sweatshirt, inside her body.
Raffaele - now what is LCN amount of his y-haplotype doing only on the metal hook of the clasp? (And why did the cops rub and fondle those hooks so much?)
 
Katody Matrass said:
Guilt theory requires a miraculous selective cleanup to explain the complete lack of any other bloody footprints or fingerprints while Guede's are numerous.
Guilters seem to irrationally believe that by proposing any kind of clean up they'll jump over that impassable through logic barrier.

Of all of them only Yummi/Machiavelli seemed to understand that huge problem in their theories. IIRC he proposed some very strange explanations. In his opinion AK and RS carefully strewed some rags or towels all over the flat to preserve the barely visible Guede's tracks, while they were running all over the place doing staging.
Click to expand...

and the fact it was night time, then during the next morning...

would someone who "supposedly knew" the tracks were there of Rudy, these two would walk on the bloody tracks possibly getting Merediths blood DNA on their own shoes?

as we know everyone was walking on the bloody Nike prints during the 20 minutes of the Nov 2 morning when the door was kicked in.

Its still pure chance that Raffaele didnt have Merediths blood DNA on his shoes from being in the cottage that morning and walking on Rudys bloody tracks...Amanda too for that matter.

How many people were in the cottage Nov 2? Filomena+ friends, RS & AK, 2 Postals....all walking on top of Rudys bloody tracks, yet to be found.


Just another thought why the "miraculous cleanup" doesn't make any sense.
 
Last edited:
I agree the source mentioned the cigarette end. However, that hardly changes the argument.

I can't help wondering why the cops were so excited about the bra clasp before it had even been tested. I mean, no other trace of Raffaele in the flat (apart from a cigarette end, OK), but they're so wired about that one item. Could they see the right y-haplotype on it when they picked it up or something?

A lot of this is awfully bass-ackward. The DNA result must be incriminating because there was no other trace of Raffaele in the flat. What? Amanda is a vicious sex killer because she didn't have a shower after doing this vicious sex killing. What?

Rolfe.
 
The selective clean-up of nigh-invisible evidence is a ludicrous idea. I mean, what? How is anyone supposed to believe that, really? Let's clean up, and we're so good at that because we're so domesticated (Amanda is hardly Aggie MacKenzie, let's face it) that we can do a perfect job and still leave Rudy's DNA there. Who's kidding who?

And then I'll just admit I was there but blame it all on Patrick and not mention Rudy at all. That'll definitely make sure nobody suspects us....

:hb:

Rolfe.
 
Dan O. said:
If I spelt out what I meant the auto-censor would hit me :D


Actually, the paragraph was from my archive of the Google translated text. The Italian text says "laurea in Scienze Biologiche" and Google now translates this as "graduated in Biological Sciences".
Click to expand...


Stefanoni has nothing more than a BSc-level degree. In Italy, owing to an anomaly stemming from the titles awarded by the ancient University of Bologna (and codified through legislation in the mid-1990s), BA/BSc/BEng-level first-degree graduates are entitled to term themselves "Dottore" (male) or "Dottoressa" (female). Masters-level graduates of Italian universities refer to themselves as "Dottore (or Dottoressa) Magistrale", and PhD-level academics (the level at which the term "Doctor" is applied in pretty much every other civilised country in the world) refer to themselves as "Dottore (or Dottoressa) di Ricerca".

All the evidence points to the fact that Stefanoni did not continue her higher education beyond first-degree level. And I also feel confident that in the "war of qualification" that she's attempted to engage in against the independent professor-level DNA experts, she (or Comondi) would have felt it necessary to refer to "Dottoressa Magistrale Stefanoni" or "Dottoressa di Ricerca Stefanoni" if she indeed had either of these higher qualifications.

So the reasonable conclusion is that Ms Stefanoni has a bachelor-level degree, and no higher qualifications (either masters-level or PhD-level). When people on English-speaking forums (or media) refer to "Doctor Stefanoni", it's my view that they are either ignorant of the reality of Stefanoni's true academic level of qualification, or that they are intentionally aiming to mislead others into believing that Stefanoni has a PhD-level qualification. My belief is that many more pro-guilt commentators referring to "Doctor Stefanoni" belong to the second camp than belong to the first camp.
 
Stefanoni would be classed as a chief technician, where I come from. I wonder if it was even an honours degree?

She has a technician's job, she just happens to be on the top of the heap when it comes to giving the evidence in court.

Cripes, I've had technicians with BScs in various biological sciences who weren't capable of understanding how the instruments they were using actually worked. They give these degrees out like boy scout badges these days.

Rolfe.
 
Dan O. said:
He does say that the first thing he saw was Filomena's door was wide open. But in the same statement he is saying that Amanda took the mop into another part of the house which would be through the door into the hall where the mop was eventually recovered. If Raffaele is going another direction, the only door he could be going to would be Laura's. Amanda would be at Filomena's door first to open it after depositing the mop.





It wouldn't matter if the front door was fully open all night. Amanda's part of the cottage is like a separate building fully insulated from the old section with only the single door connecting them so there would be no draft. In addition, the double glass door to the patio and the skylight in the bath would be letting in the morning sun.
Click to expand...

It's almost unbelievable to me the extent to which some will go to portray every last single item of evidence in a light favorable to the defendants.

I assert that it was probably around 10ºC in the flat that morning, and this draws post upon post of argument - upon an item that I have already conceded should not be seen as a primary determinant of guilt. Dan O. - you seem to revel in this minutiae, so let me ask you: how do you know if this interior door was closed? Going beyond that, have you performed all the heat transfer equations to demonstrate to the rest of us that, indeed, the ambient temperature within the apartment at around 10AM on the morning of 2 November 2007 was not approximately 10ºC? What is your margin of error, and your α value? I'm sure you can tell us exactly how many BTUs the flat's heating system was putting out during this period, the R-values of the various building materials utilized, the conduction rate of heat from the flat below, the degree of solar insolation transmitted through non-opaque surfaces, the amount of heat transferred from the investigators' bodies to the flat during the afternoon and evening of 2 November, the amount of natural ventilation within the flat over the night of 1/2 November and the attendant heat loss given the ratio of closed vs. open surfaces, and any other factors which I may have overlooked, seeing as how I am not an engineer with training in the study of thermodynamics?

If so, I would like to see your work.

If not, I'm sticking with my estimation. I see no reasonable reason not to do so.
 
misteratunta said:
So you accept that showering in cold conditions is nothing to be suspicious about? Then what in God's name is your point?
Click to expand...

I accept that showering in cold conditions is nothing to be suspicious about absent any ready-at-hand alternatives. Big difference.
 
So you think this crazed sex killer did the crazed sex killing and then didn't take a shower? But for some bizarre reason tried to pretend she did?

(I could sort of see the opposite - have an extremely thorough wash then pretend you hadn't - but the above is simply perverse.)

Rolfe.
 
LondonJohn said:
To think! Piktor was quite indignant in his/her assertion that the blood on the bathroom door edge was at shoulder height - and I was stupid enough to take him/her at his/her word! Turns out that this was totally incorrect! thanks for finding a wider-angle photo of the door that shows the actual truth as opposed to an ignorant (but quite assertive) guess. As you say, it's most likely therefore that Guede's right knee had blood on it and that it brushed the edge of the open door as Guede entered the bathroom.

The rest of your points are all valuable and entirely valid as well. What it boils down to is that Piktor's original "argument" on this issue - that the evidence on the two doors somehow proves that Knox/Sollecito engaged in a post-crime clean-up - is entirely bogus and incorrect. I hope that Piktor stops trying to defend the indefensible at this point, and perhaps moves on to trying to find even more increasingly-tenuous ways to "prove" Knox and Sollecito were involved in the murder or clean-up. If so, I look forward to reading and thoroughly debunking each and every one of them.
Click to expand...

I've observed in the past that the Massei/Christiani narrative is really quite preposterous, but that it's sane compared to the various bits of embroidery and fanfic that the on-line guilter community have tacked on to it over time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom