Continuation Part 4: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[bookworm]

Once again, certain pro-guilt commentators appear to be too ignorant or too biased to understand the nuanced argument regarding the issue of splitting low-template DNA samples for testing purposes.

Here's the conundrum: if you have a tiny amount of DNA to work with, then regardless of the sensitivity of the testing equipment (and in fact, the more sensitive the equipment, the bigger the potential problem), there is always going to be background "noise" and other artifacts that produce false peaks or stutters in the results charts. This is somewhat analogous to the difference between identifying someone's voice if they are speaking loudly at a party, versus identifying the same person's voice at the same party if they are now speaking very softly: the background noise will interfere far more with the second scenario than with the first one.

One way to address this inherent problem in low-template DNA typing is to split the sample. If the split sample is tested twice, then the charts for the two tests can be compared and contrasted. If certain peaks and stutters are repeated exactly on both samples, then it's possible to say with a fair degree of confidence that these peaks/stutters derive from the sample itself, rather than from any background "noise" (which tends to be somewhat random in nature).

But of course there's an inherent paradox here: if the sample only contains a tiny amount of DNA to start with, then splitting it into two "sub-samples" is obviously undesirable (and may indeed be impossible). However, regardless of this clear paradox, there is one overarching factor which informs the entire argument on this issue (and which some pro-guilt commentators seem either unable or unwilling to understand): if the state is going to use DNA evidence to convict someone of a crime, then the DNA evidence needs to be robust, reliable and replicable. That is a fundamental tenet of not only justice, but also of the science underpinning the DNA evidence itself.

What it means in practice is this: if there is so little DNA on a sample that it cannot be split for the purposes of conducting two separate LCN tests, then that sample must - almost by definition - be deemed inadmissible for use as probative evidence in a criminal trial. That's because the unreliability of a single-test result at these low levels is simply too high for the result to be meaningful in the context of proving identity in a criminal trial.

And as a peripheral consideration, if there is so very little DNA on a given sample that it can't be split for testing, then - quite apart from the unreliability of test results - the underlying issue of transfer/contamination also becomes significant in and of itself. In other words, if there is a huge amount of someone's DNA on an item, one can not only get a very reliable test result, but one can be very confident that there was a genuine transfer between the person and the item at some point. If, on the other hand, there are only a few molecules of a person's DNA on an item, the problems of test reliability are compounded by the possibility that such a minute amount of DNA arrived on the item by secondary/tertiary transfer or by contamination.

Thank you LondonJohn for that readable and understandable explanation for us non-DNA literate readers!

 

[anglolawyer]

Greetings Anglolawyer,
I too have wondered whether it ws a mushroom that Meredith ate.
And for a long time I thought so.

However, I keep an open mind, and since I did not attend the trial nor see most of the photogrphs and video presentations or recreations, I place a lotta weight with what Mr. Frank Sfarzo reports over what I read elswhere.

Reading the current comments section of Perugia Shock,
I saw Frank discussing with a person named Clive whether it was a piece of apple or a piece of mushroom that was found:

I am posting the discussion and response here, it made me change my mind...

Clive:
"Frank

Meredith ate some mushroom when/after she came home. It was found, still undigested, in her oesophagus and was not consumed in the meal she shared with her friends. There was a large tub of mushroom on what is probably her shelf in the fridge. Therefore, she was not attacked upon entry.

Perugia Shock:
"It looked like a mushroom but it’s not. It was a slice of apple from the previous dinner."

Clive:
"Frank

The mushroom fragment was undigested and located in the oesophagus, not the stomach. Mushroom is a fungus and apple is a fruit, they probably aren’t easily confused, and no one (so far as I know) disputed the nature of the fragment at the first trial (admittedly, I base this on Massei, which is not the firmest ground). If that is Meredith’s shelf in the fridge she was clearly quite fond of mushrooms and extensive research among my friends reveals the existence of people who snack on refrigerated mushroom.


Perugia Shock:
"Well, she wasn’t fond on mushrooms, especially when they were raw and dirty, as the ones in the fridge were.
Indeed a washed and sliced mushroom, of which she would have eaten one only slice, wasn’t found in the house.
In the stomach, instead, there were other slices looking exactly the same as the one in the esophagus. So it was a fragment of the same apple, and it came back from the stomach during the assault."


Interesting point...
L8, RW


PS- Frank Sfarzo also discusses Nara's scream abit more:
"Exactly, she never said she heard the scream at 11:30, it’s Mignini who tries to hint that she said that. She never said she heard 3 people running (have a look at my mini interview with her), it’s Mignini who tries to hint that.
She said I heard some steps on the stairs and, almost at the same time, some steps She said I went to sleep at about 9 and I heard the scream after a while. on the gravel. That’s it.

Hi, thanks for that. I am the Clive who was in discussion with Frank and I am still sticking to the mushroom until actually tests the darned fragment (what is it with klutz's who investigated this case?). One of ye defence appeals wanted it tested but Hellman decided it was unnecessary. Pity.

 

[anglolawyer]

___________________

Anglo,

There is evidence that a chair was knocked over in the kitchen.

Rudy claimed that he held the chair in self-defene against a knife-wielding stranger. His attorneys wanted the chair examined to establish Rudy's contact with the chair.

One way of interpreting Rudy's bloody shoeprints in the kitchen is that he paused and picked-up an upended chair and set properly in place at the kitchen table. See HERE.
.

///

Interesting. Thanks. Didn't know of that idea. I will reflect on that

 

[Katody Matrass]

I believe that the only parties who have the right to appeal to the Supreme Court are defence lawyers (appealing on behalf of the defendant(s)) and prosecuting authorities (appealing on behalf of the State). And, as has been pointed out previously, the prosecution appeal has to come from the Attorney General of the relevant Italian region - the local prosecutors' office which prosecuted the case in the previous two trials is not directly involved in any prosecution appeal.

The relevant region would be Umbria with the capital Perugia . Galati, who is the Attorney General made the news by showing in courtroom during the trial to express support for Mignini and criticise the independent experts' work (although media reports are very cryptic about what he really said about it).

 

[Katody Matrass]

"infondate e con evidenti lacune"
unfounded and with obvious gaps - that's what Galati said about the Conti-Vechiotti report in court.

 

[RWVBWL]

Always good to see your posts RW.

The fermentation was for the 2.1 reading they had in a different test. Lalli did the coroner tests and they were validated by a liver alcohol level test. The Massei court has her with .43g/l of alcohol in her system.

Page 112 Lalli > "He stated that the results of the toxicological analyses revealed the absence of psychotropic drugs and a blood alcohol level of 0.43 grams/litre."

Prof Cingolani said on page 152-3 > "He then went on to detail the outcome of the alcohol level test. He recalled that the level of alcohol found in Perugia at the Institute of Forensic Medicine was 0.43 grams per litre; the [level] that had been [152] detected in the blood, however, at the headquarters of the expert report commissioned for the pre-trial hearing [incidente probatorio] was 2.72 grams per litre. On the basis of such contrasting results, a check was carried out on the alcohol percentage in other regions: in the gastric content and then in the liver. A value substantially of zero had been found in the gastric content and, he stressed, ‚in the gastric content the quantity of alcohol is frighteningly greater than in the blood‛ (page 106). In the liver too a very slight quantity had been detected, equal to 0.2, which was comparable from the pharmacokinetic point of view with the 0.43 verified by Dr. Lalli at the Institute of Forensic Medicine"

Massei noted that it was determined she was not intoxicated, not that she hadn't had anything to drink.

The last remark consistent with early reports that she was not guilty of any wrong doing. Early on the media reports were of a sex game gone bad or some such theory which made Meredith look as if had been part of this game. After a very short period of time the police/prosecution were saying that Meredith had done nothing wrong. I'm NOT saying she was drunk but Massei clearly says she had alcohol in her system.

Hi Grinder,
Thanks for the warm welcome, always good to read your posts too!

Regarding your theory that Miss Kercher had some wine when she came home, I wonder, was the open wine bottle ever found? Or did Guede discard it? What about the glass she drank from, surely it would have dried wine inside the bottom of it? Or did Miss Kercher wash the glass before she was brutaly slain? Or did Rudy wash the glass? Or did Rudy throw away the glass? And the wine bottle?

I was drinking a glass or 2 of Carlos Rossi Sangria this late morning as I munched on an egg, cheese and sausage muffin today, so I'm wondering about your theory. Did Meredith Kercher have some wine after she came home, either alone or with Rudy Guede? Rudy said he drank directly from the OJ bottle, why? Why not get a glass and pour some into it if you are on a date with a cute gal? Did Guede take a shot of vodka or some other hard liquor and then chase it with OJ?
Hmmm, I wonder...

From what I know, the person who broke into the lawyers office also drank some juice too. Why? Was Guede unknowingly an early diabetic and craved OJ, as I once saw when watching the Godfather 3 movie and Pacino had an episode?

I don't know, but from all that I have read, there does not seem to be evidence left that Miss Kercher had a glass of wine when she arrived home...

Check this out:
For the last 3 years, I've been doing research on an old shark attack that cost a young woman her life many years ago. She had coffee and muffins on the beach with her boyfriend shortly before entering the water to go on a short 1.5 mile kayak paddle to a pier, but they both never returned. When she was luckily found 2 days later, she had been killed by a Great White Shark that removed about 13" of her left thigh, amongst other wounds. Her death was Shark Bite with Exsanguition. She bled to death. Her atuopsy report stated that her stomach had some air in it, and a slight amount of fluid which is light brown in color, with some white flocculent food material. Coffee and the muffin? Sure...

So I wonder Grinder,
where was the red colored fluid, the wine, that surely would have been inside Miss Kercher's stomach if she drank it right before her death?
See ya, RW



PS-Thanks again for the warm welcome back,
I usually do not post because I do not like the moderation waiting game...

 

[Grinder]

I still don't see why figuring out exactly how the attack started or whether or not a piece of mushroom was consumed or if it was regurgitated apple make much of difference in whether the kids should have been found not guilty or if in fact they are innocent.

As has been made clear I'm much more interested in whether or not she had a drink after she returned home. It is clear that the alcohol in her system didn't come from her drinking the night before as it would have had to stay in her system for 16 hours (5am to 9pm) or longer. She could have had several drinks before going to her friends or she could had a couple of drinks during the movie but that was denied by the English girls.

If she drank with someone early enough to have the .43 and not have much in her stomach then it was not with the kids that she drank, which is why I think it is important.

 

[RWVBWL]

Hi, thanks for that. I am the Clive who was in discussion with Frank and I am still sticking to the mushroom until actually tests the darned fragment (what is it with klutz's who investigated this case?). One of ye defence appeals wanted it tested but Hellman decided it was unnecessary. Pity.

Greetings Anglolawyer,
Glad to read your posts here and elsewhere too, for it does help interested folks to try and decipher the clues left to try and understand what happened during the final minutes of a young woman's life that was tragicallly and so brutally taken from her.

As Frank Sfarzo mentioned,
where was the rest of the mushroom though? How come Meredith only took 1 bite, a slice of it? Mr. Sfarzo states that it appears to be the same as the other pieces of apple found inside her. I would suppose this looks somewhat like a slice, not a bite. Surely there should be more that just 1 piece of a mushroom in her stomach. Or did Guede start the assault as she 1st bit into that mushroom or slice of it? She did not eat any more, and after murdering her, then Guede later discarded the mushroom outside of the residence. For some reason I don't think so.

I just can't see Guede,
he who was seeing red, taking a partially bitten or sliced mushroom, (and I'm tryin' to help out Grinder's theory here), also washing or removing a wine glass, and/or a wine bottle, from the residence, along with the murder knife, Meredith's keys, her cash, credit cards, and cell phones on his way out of there...

If he threw away the wine glass or the wine bottle, and the mushroom,
why didn't he throw away the other shrooms inside the frig?

Good theory that raises questions which helps us narrow down an answer for when Miss Kercher was 1st attacked...

Take it easy, RW

 

[RWVBWL]

Shutter issue...

Regarding the shutters:
IIRC, Machiavelli stated the wind the night Miss Kercher was slain was blowing about 13 miles per hour. Now it has been my impression that areas at the tops of canyons and hillsides are often a lot windier that most other parts of a city.

We have a light Santa Ana wind event happening in parts of Los Angeles today. These winds start the wicked fires that you folks elsewhere will sometimes here about, this when Malibu burns. Certain parts of Southern California have had gusts upward of 40 miles per hour today.

I was up at the crack of dawn this morning, standing atop a small hillside adjacent to an American flag, overlooking the Pacific Ocean. When the wind is blowin' good, I sometimes take my Davis Windscribe up there to measure the wind. Today I first recorded average winds from 8 to 13 - 14 miles per hour, and then a few stronger gusts hit that got up to 19.8 miles per hour. It did get a little stronger after I left:
http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=MMBUC1

At 13 miles per hour, this is what a weather station in Perugia supposedly measured the wind the night Meredith Kercher was murdered. Aware of this, I noticed that the bushes and palm trees were swaying pretty good, and that American flag was loudly snappin' and cracklin' in the wind. As the wind is usually stronger on the top of a ravine or hilltop where I was, I can easily see that wind whipping the shutters to Filomena's bedroom open and banging them against the house, for the gals place was atop a canyon or ravine, if you care to call it that.

I highly doubt that Filomena's shutters were in the same position they were found in as when that 8.8lb rock was thrown thru her window.
Don't believe me?
Stand upon a hillside and measure the wind at 13 miles per hour, watch the trees sway, a flag flap, snap and crackle in the wind and you'll know what I mean...

Massei was wrong.
L8, RW

 

[smkovalinksy]

This kind of pre-victory crowing on PMF about Perugia Chief Prosecutor Giovanni Galati is just dreadful, and makes me wish LJ 's intuition about the possibility of no appeal being filed by the attorney general would become the reality, BUT -

Somehow, I do not think Knox will be so lucky:

I expect Galati to step up to the plate and knock it out of the park. Hellmann's report comes from way out in left field and his reliance on the bush-league Conti & Vecchiotti analysis might prove an easy out for Galati. Knox got herself a raincheck for now but it ain't over till it's over.
Play ball!

 

[smkovalinksy]

Aaaaannnnd.......I knew it:

hugo wrote:
If anyone missed it, TJMK reports, citing Andrea Vogt's Twitter feed, that Umbrian chief prosecutor Dr Giovanni Galati has said he will indeed appeal Hellmann to the supreme court and will publish his reasoning by the end of the month. His lack of contentment with the C&V fiasco is already on record. He seems to be in good standing with Cassation as he used to work there.

 

[Dougm]

Regarding the shutters:
IIRC, Machiavelli stated the wind the night Miss Kercher was slain was blowing about 13 miles per hour. Now it has been my impression that areas at the tops of canyons and hillsides are often a lot windier that most other parts of a city.

We have a light Santa Ana wind event happening in parts of Los Angeles today. These winds start the wicked fires that you folks elsewhere will sometimes here about, this when Malibu burns. Certain parts of Southern California have had gusts upward of 40 miles per hour today.

I was up at the crack of dawn this morning, standing atop a small hillside adjacent to an American flag, overlooking the Pacific Ocean. When the wind is blowin' good, I sometimes take my Davis Windscribe up there to measure the wind. Today I first recorded average winds from 8 to 13 - 14 miles per hour, and then a few stronger gusts hit that got up to 19.8 miles per hour. It did get a little stronger after I left:
http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=MMBUC1

At 13 miles per hour, this is what a weather station in Perugia supposedly measured the wind the night Meredith Kercher was murdered. Aware of this, I noticed that the bushes and palm trees were swaying pretty good, and that American flag was loudly snappin' and cracklin' in the wind. As the wind is usually stronger on the top of a ravine or hilltop where I was, I can easily see that wind whipping the shutters to Filomena's bedroom open and banging them against the house, for the gals place was atop a canyon or ravine, if you care to call it that.

I highly doubt that Filomena's shutters were in the same position they were found in as when that 8.8lb rock was thrown thru her window.
Don't believe me?
Stand upon a hillside and measure the wind at 13 miles per hour, watch the trees sway, a flag flap, snap and crackle in the wind and you'll know what I mean...

Massei was wrong.
L8, RW

An even better reason Massei was wrong: Someone (let's call him "Guede" ) could have climbed up and opened them first, unless they were locked shut, which was not possible. Wind or no wind, the shutters were not an impossible barrier.

 

[Grinder]

So I wonder Grinder,
where was the red colored fluid, the wine, that surely would have been inside Miss Kercher's stomach if she drank it right before her death?
See ya, RW

If I said wine, that was a misstatement. There were reports of broken glass and they originally said the neck wound was either from a pen knife or shard of glass.

From ABC Nov. 7, 2007 - Kercher was found half-naked and in a pool of blood with a deep cut in her throat. Authorities said she was stabbed with a pen knife or sharp piece of glass, likely while trying to fight off a sexual attack.

What might have happened to the bottle the alcohol came in is not my department (said Werner von Braun, old Tom Lehrer line) - but it could be she had a quick shot or swig - her specialty were Mojitos so maybe she kept some rum in the house.

She had alcohol in her system where did it come from? After death? Maybe some but not so much in the temperatures of Perugia that day.

 

[anglolawyer]

Greetings Anglolawyer,
Glad to read your posts here and elsewhere too, for it does help interested folks to try and decipher the clues left to try and understand what happened during the final minutes of a young woman's life that was tragicallly and so brutally taken from her.

As Frank Sfarzo mentioned,
where was the rest of the mushroom though? How come Meredith only took 1 bite, a slice of it? Mr. Sfarzo states that it appears to be the same as the other pieces of apple found inside her. I would suppose this looks somewhat like a slice, not a bite. Surely there should be more that just 1 piece of a mushroom in her stomach. Or did Guede start the assault as she 1st bit into that mushroom or slice of it? She did not eat any more, and after murdering her, then Guede later discarded the mushroom outside of the residence. For some reason I don't think so.

I just can't see Guede,
he who was seeing red, taking a partially bitten or sliced mushroom, (and I'm tryin' to help out Grinder's theory here), also washing or removing a wine glass, and/or a wine bottle, from the residence, along with the murder knife, Meredith's keys, her cash, credit cards, and cell phones on his way out of there...

If he threw away the wine glass or the wine bottle, and the mushroom,
why didn't he throw away the other shrooms inside the frig?

Good theory that raises questions which helps us narrow down an answer for when Miss Kercher was 1st attacked...

Take it easy, RW

We don't know how big the fragment of mushroom/apple was. If it was very small (a medical friend tells me) it may simply never have reached the stomach. In that case, it could be a fragment of apple from the earlier meal with the girls. If it were larger then it is more likely it passed into her stomach and came back up into the oesophagus during the assault. In that case, if it were apple consumed a couple of hours earlier it would not have come back up 'undigested'.

I got interested when I saw in the 18/12/2007 CSI vid a tub of mushroom on a shelf in the fridge which also has a jar with 'Meredith' written on the lid. I infer this is her shelf and her mushroom. So, she is fond of mushroom and something thought to be mushroom is found 'undigested' in her oesophagus. Why not her mushroom? There need not be a sliced mushroom somewhere in the kitchen - she may just have broken off or bitten a piece. She may have washed the mushroom before she refrigerated it, or she might not have cared about some good, healthy mud on her mushroom (to answer Frank Sfarzo's point).

The defence wanted the item tested on appeal (wanting it to be apple) but that's because they lost at first instance and Meredith's consumption of the mushroom was used by Massei to point to a late TOD. This is understandable but, unburdened with the task of defending anyone, I see it as pointing to an early TOD when interpreted with everything else (the jacket, the books, shoes, washing etc.) precisely because it was undigested.

@Grinder

Apologies. The alcohol question is important but I have not posted in reply to you because I don't understand it. Is it certain she consumed alcohol? If so, we need to identify all possible sources of alcohol in the apartment. Maybe she took a swig of something, I don't know. I can't imagine why Rudy would tidy up after her if she did. What are your thoughts? Maybe we can zero in on a plausible explanation - once it is clear she definitely, or anyway probably, consumed alcohol.

Btw. I just think it's interesting figuring out what happened. I should be astonished if, in trying to do so, the overall assessment of who killed her altered.

 

[anglolawyer]

Regarding the shutters:
IIRC, Machiavelli stated the wind the night Miss Kercher was slain was blowing about 13 miles per hour. Now it has been my impression that areas at the tops of canyons and hillsides are often a lot windier that most other parts of a city.

We have a light Santa Ana wind event happening in parts of Los Angeles today. These winds start the wicked fires that you folks elsewhere will sometimes here about, this when Malibu burns. Certain parts of Southern California have had gusts upward of 40 miles per hour today.

I was up at the crack of dawn this morning, standing atop a small hillside adjacent to an American flag, overlooking the Pacific Ocean. When the wind is blowin' good, I sometimes take my Davis Windscribe up there to measure the wind. Today I first recorded average winds from 8 to 13 - 14 miles per hour, and then a few stronger gusts hit that got up to 19.8 miles per hour. It did get a little stronger after I left:
http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=MMBUC1

At 13 miles per hour, this is what a weather station in Perugia supposedly measured the wind the night Meredith Kercher was murdered. Aware of this, I noticed that the bushes and palm trees were swaying pretty good, and that American flag was loudly snappin' and cracklin' in the wind. As the wind is usually stronger on the top of a ravine or hilltop where I was, I can easily see that wind whipping the shutters to Filomena's bedroom open and banging them against the house, for the gals place was atop a canyon or ravine, if you care to call it that.

I highly doubt that Filomena's shutters were in the same position they were found in as when that 8.8lb rock was thrown thru her window.
Don't believe me?
Stand upon a hillside and measure the wind at 13 miles per hour, watch the trees sway, a flag flap, snap and crackle in the wind and you'll know what I mean...

Massei was wrong.
L8, RW

According to Dempsey, Filomena complained to the landlord a week before the crime that her shutters did not close properly and blew open. If this is true it explains why that window was chosen: Rudy may have seen the shutters open and all the lights out. Indeed, I think this is very likely because it is probably very difficult to open locked shutters from the outside without some serious equipment and Rudy is unlikely to have just gambled on finding a set of closed, but defective shutters.

This is important because it answers one of the big questions in the case: why did Rudy choose that window?

 

[Katody Matrass]

Aaaaannnnd.......I knew it:

If anyone missed it, TJMK reports, citing Andrea Vogt's Twitter feed, that Umbrian chief prosecutor Dr Giovanni Galati has said he will indeed appeal Hellmann to the supreme court and will publish his reasoning by the end of the month

I don't see anything like this in Vogt's twitter. I call shenanigans Such Galati's announcement would be all over the news by now, if it existed. I'm afraid TJMK made it up.

 

[Dougm]

According to Dempsey, Filomena complained to the landlord a week before the crime that her shutters did not close properly and blew open. If this is true it explains why that window was chosen: Rudy may have seen the shutters open and all the lights out. Indeed, I think this is very likely because it is probably very difficult to open locked shutters from the outside without some serious equipment and Rudy is unlikely to have just gambled on finding a set of closed, but defective shutters.

This is important because it answers one of the big questions in the case: why did Rudy choose that window?

The exterior shutters did not lock.

 

[Grinder]

According to Dempsey, Filomena complained to the landlord a week before the crime that her shutters did not close properly and blew open. If this is true it explains why that window was chosen: Rudy may have seen the shutters open and all the lights out. Indeed, I think this is very likely because it is probably very difficult to open locked shutters from the outside without some serious equipment and Rudy is unlikely to have just gambled on finding a set of closed, but defective shutters.

Just as interesting is why the kids theoretically would pick her window to stage the break in. The height of the window would look even more difficult to them than to Rudy. Is it theorized that they walked around the house and then picked that window?

It would seem that they would have left the balcony door unlocked or even stuck a screwdriver in that door and made it look like someone had jimmied it open. Since the idea is that the kids were leaving Rudy's evidence behind, why wouldn't they just go with the scenario that Meredith let him in or that he forced his way in when she returned.

The whole idea that they would think of the need to stage makes no sense to me.

I come back to the fact that none of the PGP can put together a cogent account of how the three came together and agreed to murder Meredith. Or why the least guilty of the three didn't cop a plea and turn state's.

It still seems that the staging is a diversion from the basic facts that no evidence of the kids was found tying them to the murder and there is plenty tying the Rudy. Rudy could have broken in, he could have thrown the rock and then gone in with Meredith or he could have staged it because he thought Meredith had talked about their date. We will never know unless somebody talks.

 

[smkovalinksy]

I don't see anything like this in Vogt's twitter. I call shenanigans Such Galati's announcement would be all over the news by now, if it existed. I'm afraid TJMK made it up.

............ ....

 

[Grinder]

I don't see anything like this in Vogt's twitter. I call shenanigans Such Galati's announcement would be all over the news by now, if it existed. I'm afraid TJMK made it up.

I double your call and raise you a malarkey

Did they actually say Vogt had tweated that?