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

[anglolawyer]

anglolawyer,

Although the idea of Rudy as a stalker is worth exploring, IIRC Meredith's rent money and credit cards were missing. If Rudy went as a burglar, it would probably have been with the intention of obtaining things he did not have to fence, IMO.

He took those after the murder. He did not, on arrival, set about stripping the apartment of valuables. Of course, that might be because he was caught short soon after getting in so there is an explanation for why nothing was missing from Filomena's room which fits the burglary scenario.

 

[anglolawyer]

Your shoe idea is interesting. A couple of months ago I was looking at a photo of the bedroom and trying to work out if both shoes were still laced up. One certainly is; the other was less clear. I did wonder if she had one off and then got attacked. Of course it's possible she simply pulled off her own shoes without unlacing them. I've done that when I'm tired (as she was).

It is very clear from the photos that one shoe has been unlaced and the eyes pulled apart to facilitate removal while the knot in the other has been yanked upwards, pulling the eyes together and probably tightening the knot, making removal more difficult. If Rudy removed both shoes, the standard model theory, then he was in a frenzy when he removed one and calm and rational when he remove the other. We know he was frantic when he removed the bra. We also know, I think, why he was frantic. He wanted sexual gratification.

Rudy's DNA may have been located under the knot or on one or both shoes. Did Stefanoni test the shoes? As they will have been carefully sealed in rainforest conditions we can probably abandon that line of enquiry.

If we have Meredith remove both shoes there seem to be two variations: one with and one without a kitchen confrontation. The shoes rule out neither, but the house socks on the bed are a small pointer to the latter as she may have put those on before setting off to the kitchen to fetch the laundry. Personally, I would have her collect the laundry with shoes on but as she was dog tired I don't think she was interested in the laundry or the cat or the weed, but in getting into bed to read a little then sleep.

 

[freeski]

And guess what? Lumumba could no more manage a break-in than either Knox or Sollecito. It must have seemed to the cops that all the initial instincts had been borne out. "Wow, we really are smarter than we think! The break-in was staged after all!"

That's very true. Once they had Lumumba, then it would be highly unlikely that the break-in was real. They only have to ask if Lumumba would have broken in - the other two clearly don't have to. And basically, it's very unlikely Lumumba would or could have broken that window and climbed up there.

Then again, once Guede is on the scene, why they didn't abandon the staging of the break-in as being necessary, is beyond me.

Because at that point they were completely committed to the orgy scenario. They had staked their reputations on it: "case closed". The worldwide media was full of it. Anyway Mignini loves a bit of satanic orgy so back tracking would ruin his worldview. In their opinion, to go back on the orgy theory and suddenly say, oh bugger actually it was a break-in, we just found a guy who's a burglar and his DNA is everywhere, they would have looked like fools. And with egos like these guys have, they had to save face. It was damage limitation to simply switch Guede for Lumumba. A tragedy for so many.

There's a thing some people hold: if you're innocent you have nothing to be afraid of. It falls down on one simple point: it assumes the police/prosecution are interested in truth. In fact they are interested in closing/winning the case, and making themselves look good. Innocence and truth come second to all that. That's true to some degree all over the world. In Italy where the prosecution, police, scientific police and some of the judges are effectively all the same institution, then it's guaranteed.

 

[geebee2]

With regards to the contamination issue, at least with respect to the bra-clasp, I don't think it occurred.

Rather Stefanoni interpreted noise as data, and coerced the data to fit Raffaele's profile. This was reported by Perugia Shock, and I give my understanding of this here http://www.injusticeinperugiaforum.org/post28408.html#p28408


The alternative explanation (which seems quite unlikely to me) is that there were at least 8 people's DNA on the bra clasp, which would indicate contamination, but I think it's much more likely the LCN "data" was just noise.

Whether this is also the case with Meredith's DNA on the knife I'm not sure - it could again just be noise, because the amount reportedly detected ( 5 picograms IIRC) is way, way below the normal limits. I think LCN is anything below 200 picograms. Noise or laboratory contamination in this case seems of minor interest, because we now know that in fact there was starch on the blade, not blood, and laboratory contamination can happen very easily, which is why controls are essential.

Replying to my own post here... I have just seen the interpretation of the DNA test on the knife, the profile match seems quite clear. The most likely explanation is laboratory contamination. For LCN DNA this is known to occur very easily, and seems by far the most likely explanation, given that control runs with no test material were not conducted ( as I believe was the case ). I would not entirely rule the knife evidence out a priori, but when you factor in the unlikely and unsupported circumstantial gymastics to integrate it into the case ( more than 1 knife used in the murder, Amanda carrying it around in her bag, starch found on the blade ), the evidential effect doesn't seem positive to me.

That's to say : on it's own, we might say the chance of laboratory contamination is say 10%.
But the chance of Amanda carrying a large knife around in her bag, and two knives being used in the attack, seems less than 10% to me. So the prosecution case involving the large knife is less believable than the case without it.

 

[Grinder]

The downstairs keys are in the same category as the bleach receipt.

I looked through Massei to see if I found anything on the downstairs keys, but alas, no.

What I did find was the quote below, which the PGP didn't complain that Massei was just blowing it out his arse as they do about Hellmann:

In fact, it must be highlighted that the circumstance that Rudy knew Amanda allowed the former to approach and greet the young woman who, being [i.e. since she was] with Raffaele, could quite easily have acted as an intermediary between the two and enabled an immediate and easy acquaintanceship of each other. After all, it was in this way that Amanda had met Rudy: he was introduced to her by the young men [388] from the downstairs apartment, who knew both the one and the other (Amanda Knox statements, hearing of 12 June 2009 page 28).

Yes, yes this is brilliant thinking. Since Amanda was introduced to Rudy by the boys downstairs, she could have used the same technique to introduce Raffaele to Rudy. If only Hellmann had such a way to zero-in on the truth.

 

[Dan O.]

We can be pretty sure he did not go into Laura or Amanda's rooms (no prints and no disturbance) and he did not get up to much in the kitchen, certainly not in comparison with the activities recorded at the lawyers' office in Perugia (items arranged on desks, broken glass moved to another part of the office and arranged in a neat pile) or his neighbours apartment (meal prepared, fire started, cat killed).

Unlike the other bedrooms in the appartment, Laura's room was immaculately clean and orderly so it is quite easy to see minor disturbances in there. Two that stand out are the underwear drawer being left open and the spread on the head of the bed is wrinkled as if the mattress had been lifted up in that corner. Though not as easy to see given the general condition of Filomena's room, the spread on her bed is similarly disturbed. This is consistent with a thief looking for a stash of cash such as the €400 each girl would need to pay their rent on Monday.

 

[Kestrel]

We can be pretty sure he did not go into Laura or Amanda's rooms (no prints and no disturbance)

Crime scene photos show a drawer in Laura's otherwise immaculate room was left open. Rudy may have entered her room.

 

[Grinder]

For those that weren't following the case from the beginning or for those of us that want to review the link to the Daily Mail stories is a great start. One can see much of how the distortions occurred.

Unfortunately, the comments have been removed. Reading the old Harry Rag comments could be illuminating as well.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=7931792#post7931792

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Amanda spoke with Patrick during the day

Amanda ran into Patrick on 5 November, and told him that she would have to quit. If the police were tracking her movements, they might have known about this meeting, but I don't think anyone here is certain that the police had this knowledge. If they did, it might explain their reaction to seeing Amanda's text to Patrick.

Kestrel,

Good to see you back.

 

[Grinder]

Replying to my own post here... I have just seen the interpretation of the DNA test on the knife, the profile match seems quite clear. The most likely explanation is laboratory contamination. For LCN DNA this is known to occur very easily, and seems by far the most likely explanation, given that control runs with no test material were not conducted ( as I believe was the case ). I would not entirely rule the knife evidence out a priori, but when you factor in the unlikely and unsupported circumstantial gymastics to integrate it into the case ( more than 1 knife used in the murder, Amanda carrying it around in her bag, starch found on the blade ), the evidential effect doesn't seem positive to me.

That's to say : on it's own, we might say the chance of laboratory contamination is say 10%.
But the chance of Amanda carrying a large knife around in her bag, and two knives being used in the attack, seems less than 10% to me. So the prosecution case involving the large knife is less believable than the case without it.

I have no idea how you assign percentage probabilities to various events but the chances of the DNA coming from a source other than the knife being the murder weapon seem way higher than 10%.

Besides all of the ways 6 cells could have been found by the lab on the knife or on the machine it is more important to consider the likelihood that this knife was involved without having any DNA.

The initial reports, that were linked above, say that the police were looking for a pen knife or a screwdriver as the murder weapon. There is no way that the knife at Raffaele's would even have been considered pre-DNA. It tested negative for blood, didn't match the wounds, and there was no evidence it had ever left the flat of Raffaele. Massei's wacky idea that Amanda probably carried it around in her green bag wasn't backed by any physical evidence. Even the majority of the PGP didn't buy that explanation - no cuts in the bag, no DNA or blood in the bag, no witness that ever saw her carrying the knife - but Massei is the competent one, I think not.

The knife was not involved for sure or the defense wouldn't have pushed to have it opened by C&V and the ILE knows it.

 

[Skind]

Unless you're saying Lumumba came into the scene a couple of days before the night interview of 5/6. But is there anything to show that he was on their radar before they trawled through Amanda's messages on that fateful night.

It's hard to say if Lumumba was on the scene beforehand.

The police could have simply asked Knox for her personal details - including place of employment.
They could have witnessed him approaching her outside the college.
They could have hacked her phone and already known what messages she had. I'm guessing this would be as illegal in Italy as it is in the UK, in which case I doubt you'll ever find any record of them doing it.
The police could have recognised, or checked up on, the number. There were more than enough of them to do this without Knox noticing.

The fact that they even asked to see her phone to check her messages - and the strongarm attitutude they took with it - is a strong indication that they already had some suspicion they would find something on the phone.

 

[Skind]

He took those after the murder. He did not, on arrival, set about stripping the apartment of valuables. Of course, that might be because he was caught short soon after getting in so there is an explanation for why nothing was missing from Filomena's room which fits the burglary scenario.

I've worked with more than a few people with previous for burglary (usually drug-money style - pretty much like Guede), and a few of those have done 'odd' things whilst on the premises - including one that had a habit of going to the toilet.

Rudy might not have been 'caught short' but may have gone as part of his routine.

 

[anglolawyer]

Unlike the other bedrooms in the appartment, Laura's room was immaculately clean and orderly so it is quite easy to see minor disturbances in there. Two that stand out are the underwear drawer being left open and the spread on the head of the bed is wrinkled as if the mattress had been lifted up in that corner. Though not as easy to see given the general condition of Filomena's room, the spread on her bed is similarly disturbed. This is consistent with a thief looking for a stash of cash such as the €400 each girl would need to pay their rent on Monday.

To Kestrel also, thanks for pointing these things out. Useful to know where to look next time I need my rent money.

 

[freeski]

For those that weren't following the case from the beginning or for those of us that want to review the link to the Daily Mail stories is a great start. One can see much of how the distortions occurred.

Unfortunately, the comments have been removed. Reading the old Harry Rag comments could be illuminating as well.

Very interesting to look back at these. One of the daily mail links (can't ref link as I'm a newbie. boo hoo) reminded me of something. Way back there was a view by the police that the hair in Meredith's hand was that of an African man (before the forensics had even been done) and that that was one reason they focused on Lumumba after a few days. But I don't remember anything about this in the trials. Of course it would be Rudy's hair if that were so, but did the forensics actually show this?

This would be really important. If she had a handful of Rudy's hair it would throw doubts on the whole idea of being held down by two people. It would tend to show a more equal and desperate fight with a single assailant. And it would tend to show Rudy as a main perp rather than anyone else. Perhaps that's why the prosecution would suppress such evidence. It hardly supports their theory.

Does anyone know what happened to the hair in the hand?

 

[geebee2]

I have no idea how you assign percentage probabilities to various events but the chances of the DNA coming from a source other than the knife being the murder weapon seem way higher than 10%.

Besides all of the ways 6 cells could have been found by the lab on the knife or on the machine it is more important to consider the likelihood that this knife was involved without having any DNA.

The initial reports, that were linked above, say that the police were looking for a pen knife or a screwdriver as the murder weapon. There is no way that the knife at Raffaele's would even have been considered pre-DNA. It tested negative for blood, didn't match the wounds, and there was no evidence it had ever left the flat of Raffaele. Massei's wacky idea that Amanda probably carried it around in her green bag wasn't backed by any physical evidence. Even the majority of the PGP didn't buy that explanation - no cuts in the bag, no DNA or blood in the bag, no witness that ever saw her carrying the knife - but Massei is the competent one, I think not.

The knife was not involved for sure or the defense wouldn't have pushed to have it opened by C&V and the ILE knows it.

The 10% figure is really pure guesswork. But you cannot assume a priori that contamination ( and with Meredith's DNA ) is certain. I expect that in a significant proportion of cases, sending a blank sample to this laboratory would result in no DNA being found. The point really is that I can even assume a figure as low as 10% for contamination (or even 1%), and the prosecution case with rather than without the large knife is still no stronger.

I know that assigning probabilities is quite controversial, but I like to do it, because it communicates what level of uncertainty I place on evidence. I could also give a range, in this case I would say the probability could be anywhere from 1% to 100% that contamination would occur with a blank sample at this lab. You could attempt to determine this by carrying out experiments at this laboratory, but it could also be informed by experience with contamination in other laboratories. The problem is that it's the best labs that will probably do the best, most honest ( and most revealing ) control runs, so you have to be careful when extrapolating. What's really needed is what happens with a lab that has never done any controls (one that like this one is not set up for LCN testing). I'm guessing here, people who work in these labs would be able to make a better guess.

Please note I am talking about probabilities that are not influenced by other considerations. I'm practically certain that contamination (deliberate or accidental) did occur, due to other evidence which shows that Amanda did not commit the crime.

 

[anglolawyer]

I've worked with more than a few people with previous for burglary (usually drug-money style - pretty much like Guede), and a few of those have done 'odd' things whilst on the premises - including one that had a habit of going to the toilet.

Rudy might not have been 'caught short' but may have gone as part of his routine.

Duly noted, and accepted, but the fact remains that, prior to Meredith's arrival he had not yet pocketed anything. And if we add to the list of things he could have done after effecting an entry it still does not add up to much. No more than a few minutes leaving aside the session in the toilet.

Anyway, I was trying to make the case that he may have selected the apartment because he hoped to find her alone there and had reason to expect to do so and am constrained to accept that the mere fact that he may not have ransacked the place immediately upon arrival does not mean he was not just a burglar

 

[bolint]

What happened to the cat?
Has it ever been found?
I mean was it seen alive after Nov 1?

 

[bolint]

["Rudy (...) drinks something from the fridge (I have only encountered that in forum posts so if there is a source for it I should be interested)"

Rudy's diary written in jail in Germany waiting extradition:

"Even though I’d bought some drinks with the kebab, I
needed to drink some more because it was very spicy,
and I asked her if I could drink something. She told me
to help myself as if I was at my place. I opened the
fridge and drank some apricot juice and water too.
Since she wasn't paying attention, I drank out of the
bottle because I didn't know where the glasses were,
and then I sat down."

"We can be pretty sure he did not go into Laura or Amanda's rooms (no prints and no disturbance)"

Yet in the diary he writes:

"Also, I checked the other rooms but everything was in
order."

 

[Grinder]

The 10% figure is really pure guesswork. But you cannot assume a priori that contamination ( and with Meredith's DNA ) is certain. I expect that in a significant proportion of cases, sending a blank sample to this laboratory would result in no DNA being found. The point really is that I can even assume a figure as low as 10% for contamination (or even 1%), and the prosecution case with rather than without the large knife is still no stronger.


Please note I am talking about probabilities that are not influenced by other considerations. I'm practically certain that contamination (deliberate or accidental) did occur, due to other evidence which shows that Amanda did not commit the crime.

Playing with probabilities is too much of lying with statistics for my taste but that's not to say you shouldn't.

I think the another way of approaching it brings more clarity. So I'll play too!

What probability would the investigators looking for a penknife or a screwdriver as the murder weapon have given to Raffaele's kitchen knife before testing? I'd say .01%.

If the knife tested negative for blood, how much would that strengthen their certainty it wasn't the knife? I'd say 100 times.

What value would the investigators have given to Amanda's DNA being on the handle? They wouldn't give any value being in Raffaele's flat.

Another aspect is that no other piece of DNA from Meredith was found at Raffaele's flat. That would mean that they murdered Meredith, cleaned the cottage (ignoring that there was no evidence of a cleanup, but there had to be one), disposed of the cleaning supplies (rags, sponges, mops, etc.) without leaving them to be found in someone's garbage (ripped up and flushed?), same thing for their clothes and shoes, clean the knife and anything else they wanted to keep as a souvenir WITHOUT LEAVING ANY OTHER MK DNA in the flat.

It would appear to me that the chance the DNA on the knife coming from the murder is as close to zero as it can get.

The PGP have maintained that people were convicted without DNA until just a few years ago; therefore, it isn't a deal (guilty) breaker for the DNA to be excluded. However, in any time before DNA the knife would have been thrown out because it didn't fit the wounds and showed no blood. And that's 100%

 

[Grinder]

"Even though I’d bought some drinks with the kebab, I
needed to drink some more because it was very spicy,
and I asked her if I could drink something. She told me
to help myself as if I was at my place. I opened the
fridge and drank some apricot juice and water too.
Since she wasn't paying attention, I drank out of the
bottle because I didn't know where the glasses were,
and then I sat down."

Is apricot juice similar to turnip juice in its reaction to Luminol?