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

[Grinder]

How difficult do you think performing a TMB test is Grinder? From my understanding, you apply TMB to a cotton swab and rub it against the area where you think there might be blood and wait to see if it reacts (changes color). If it doesn't, the result is negative. Pretty damn simple if you ask me. How do they screw that up?

Not that you would put it past this group.

Looks like you could fit right in with them . If they followed your technique they could have missed a positive result. I'll bet they did it your way.

It is a two step process.

1.Swab suspected blood stain with clean filter paper or a swab, which may be moistened if necessary with deionized water, ethanol or saline.
2. Apply 1-2 drops of the TMB reagent.
3. Note any blue-green color change. A blue-green color change at this step indicates a chemical oxidant and the test should be considered inconclusive. If there is no color change, proceed to the next step.
4. Add 1-2 drops of 3% hydrogen peroxide.
5. Note any immediate blue-green color change
6. An immediate blue-green color change indicates a positive result. No
color change indicates a negative result. A negative result indicates that
either no blood is present or is below the limit of detection of the test.

 

[acbytesla]

Looks like you could fit right in with them . If they followed your technique they could have missed a positive result. I'll bet they did it your way.

It is a two step process.

1.Swab suspected blood stain with clean filter paper or a swab, which may be moistened if necessary with deionized water, ethanol or saline.
2. Apply 1-2 drops of the TMB reagent.
3. Note any blue-green color change. A blue-green color change at this step indicates a chemical oxidant and the test should be considered inconclusive. If there is no color change, proceed to the next step.
4. Add 1-2 drops of 3% hydrogen peroxide.
5. Note any immediate blue-green color change
6. An immediate blue-green color change indicates a positive result. No
color change indicates a negative result. A negative result indicates that
either no blood is present or is below the limit of detection of the test.

Interesting, does it say what is the purpose of the hydrogen peroxide?

I'm guessing that the hydrogen peroxide inhibits a reaction from other chemical oxidants but not blood. If this is the case, failing to use the hydrogen peroxide, might produce a false positive but never a false negative.

Do you know for sure?

 

[Grinder]

Interesting, does it say what the purpose of the hydrogen peroxide is?

I'm guessing that the hydrogen peroxide inhibits a reaction from other chemical oxidants but not blood. If this is the case, failing to use the hydrogen peroxide, might produce a false positive but never a false negative.

Do you know for sure?

Do know exactly what you are asking.

If they saw no color after applying the TMB, they needed to go on with the HP, but if they thought no reaction meant a negative test as you had said they would have done it wrong and a positive would have still been possible. False negative. You can't possibly think Stefanoni and crew are smarter than you (even rhymes)

Had they found it was blood my theory of the mat skateboard concept kicks in.

 

[acbytesla]

Duplicate

 

[acbytesla]

Do know exactly what you are asking.

Maybe not

If they saw no color after applying the TMB, they needed to go on with the HP, but if they thought no reaction meant a negative test as you had said they would have done it wrong and a positive would have still been possible. False negative. You can't possibly think Stefanoni and crew are smarter than you (even rhymes)

Had they found it was blood my theory of the mat skateboard concept kicks in.

I misunderstood step number 3. I see your point.

Hey, I am not a chemist or a crime scene investigator, I'm a datacom sales rep. Or was. I would hope that Stefanoni and her crew would know more than me.

 

[LondonJohn]

acbytesla,

That is pretty much right, although TMB can also be used in the lab (Stefanoni used it on the knife, for example). The literature is a little bit slim on the question of what to do after a positive luminol, followed by a negative TMB. However, I have heard it said that confirmatory testing would usually be done when both were positive. to avoid overwhelming the forensic lab with too many samples.

Yes, you're absolutely correct in your supposition: if a TMB test of a liquid-based mark comes back negative, then the general rule* is that the sample should never be DNA tested. It's easy to understand why this should be the case: the TMB test has an extremely low false negative rate** (i.e. it's extremely rare for a TMB test to show negative when there actually is blood present), so the rule is that if the TMB test is negative, then the substance is not blood, and therefore a costly DNA analysis should not even be considered.

* There are a couple of very specific exceptions to the rule, and they involve instances where there is heat or fire damage to the samples (this can lead to false negatives on blood samples).

** By contrast, TMB has quite a high false positive rate, so it's not uncommon for a TMB test to show a positive result on a sample that is not in fact blood-based.

 

[LondonJohn]

Do know exactly what you are asking.

If they saw no color after applying the TMB, they needed to go on with the HP, but if they thought no reaction meant a negative test as you had said they would have done it wrong and a positive would have still been possible. False negative. You can't possibly think Stefanoni and crew are smarter than you (even rhymes)

Had they found it was blood my theory of the mat skateboard concept kicks in.

I understand your "false negative"-based theory, but I believe that the literature suggests this to be very rare. Even a liberal dousing with Luminol should have left more than enough free Heme ions to produce a positive TMB result.

In addition, while I share your general scorn and disbelief over the "crack" forensic team's gross incompetence and malpractice, I tend to think that this is far more likely to have resulted in a false positive with TMB than a false negative (particularly if contamination or improper collection techniques had had a misleading effect on the samples being tested).

However, I would agree that if you are correct, then your subsequent theory of the route of blood deposition also makes eminent sense. But I would add that whatever the actual truth of the matter, the police come off very badly in terms of the way they handled this area of the forensics (to be added to the rest of the huge forensics mistakes and malpractices), and the prosecutors come off very badly in attempting to present these forensic exhibits as circumstantial indicators of Knox's guilt.

 

[Grinder]

Maybe not

Sorry I meant to say I didn't know what you were asking.

I would hope that Stefanoni and her crew would know more than me.

So would I. But it is possible that they screwed it up.

 

[Grinder]

I understand your "false negative"-based theory, but I believe that the literature suggests this to be very rare. Even a liberal dousing with Luminol should have left more than enough free Heme ions to produce a positive TMB result.

I really believe that all we know of the ICSI work should lead us to doubt that they much of anything correctly. I have not found anything that speaks to dousing the floor in Luminol. I assume the tests done on Luminol impact were with normal application.

In addition, while I share your general scorn and disbelief over the "crack" forensic team's gross incompetence and malpractice, I tend to think that this is far more likely to have resulted in a false positive with TMB than a false negative (particularly if contamination or improper collection techniques had had a misleading effect on the samples being tested).

That makes sense but it was Stefanoni and crew.

However, I would agree that if you are correct, then your subsequent theory of the route of blood deposition also makes eminent sense. But I would add that whatever the actual truth of the matter, the police come off very badly in terms of the way they handled this area of the forensics (to be added to the rest of the huge forensics mistakes and malpractices), and the prosecutors come off very badly in attempting to present these forensic exhibits as circumstantial indicators of Knox's guilt.

Thanks, agreed and agreed.

 

[acbytesla]

Here's my problem with your theory Grinder. While it makes sense if the footprints tested positive for blood, it is, what is your word? Otiose?

It serves no purpose to speculate because of the negative TMB test. It could be blood, but not likely.

It could also be a hundred other substances. It is my understanding that Luminol reacts to the iron in blood cells. Iron is one of the most common elements on the planet. It is found in soil, rust, a multiple of plant substances including any number of fruit juices. Shampoos etc. It is otiose to guess, because we will NEVER know.

Don't you think?

 

[Grinder]

Here's my problem with your theory Grinder. While it makes sense if the footprints tested positive for blood, it is, what is your word? Otiose?

It serves no purpose to speculate because of the negative TMB test. It could be blood, but not likely.

It could also be a hundred other substances. It is my understanding that Luminol reacts to the iron in blood cells. Iron is one of the most common elements on the planet. It is found in soil, rust, a multiple of plant substances including any number of fruit juices. Shampoos etc. It is otiose to guess, because we will NEVER know.

Don't you think?

Sure.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

luminol and the control of pH

"Luminol or fluorescein enhancement of bloodstains interferes with the possibility to
perform spectrophotometrical determination of hemoglobin, probably because the absorption peaks of reagents above cover the hemoglobin peaks and prevent from discovering them. Both reagents do not interfere with the confirmatory tests that use antihuman hemoglobin monoclonal antibody: it is very important to adjust pH to values around 7 so as to obtain a good test working."
A. Barbaro et al. / International Congress Series 1261 (2004) 631–633

The pH scale refers to acidity or alkalinity. Acidic samples taste sour, and basic samples taste bitter, although I don't recommend using this method to measure pH! In general good pH control is critical to the success of any biochemical experiment.

This paper deals with a confirmatory test, but it makes a good point that might have relevance to other tests. Luminol is typically applied under basic conditions. If other tests require acidic or neutral conditions, and if the luminol were overapplied, the test could conceivably fail. I would describe this as a plausible speculation, but it would be hard to test it without knowing more about the degree to which the luminol had been overapplied.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

"Contaminated, contaminated"

The blob in Filomena's wasn't a footprint but IIRC did have Meredith's DNA in it as well as Amanda's. At the time it came out it was one of the most troubling pieces. Now, everything is tainted by the shoddy job done by the ILE but had they been competent this mixed DNA in F's room would have been even more troubling. The curious thing would be why they didn't find more mixed DNA with other household members.

It seems that Amanda is a DNA shedding machine.

Grinder,

All of the luminol work was done on 18 December. Presumably they sampled for DNA when they saw a positive luminol test. I had a chance conversation with a former policeman from a medium sized city in New York state whose job it was to secure crime scenes and to collect evidence. I described the taking of items out of Meredith's room prior to the collection of the clasp. The first thing he said was, "Contaminated, contaminated." Based on this conversation, I am beginning to come to the view that all of the evidence collected on the 18th (against any of the three defendants) should be excluded.

With respect to Amanda's being a DNA shedding machine, I have several points. One, some people appear to shed more than others, but (at least with respect to touch DNA) it depends on things like the last time one washed one's hands. Two, Amanda and Meredith shared a bath, so it seems more likely that Amanda's DNA would be there than Laura's, for example. Simple to test for: swab the other bathroom in multiple locations (not just where Rudi moved his bowels). I think it is possible that one will find mixed Laura/Filomena DNA if one sampled enough times (but see three). Three, no reference samples were taken from Laura or Filomena, so their DNA would fall under the umbrella of "unknown." I could be wrong, but I seem to one of the samples from Filomena's room had a few extra peaks. Four, mixed DNA is a common phenomenon; moreover, the late application of luminol increased the chances that any luminol spots would have DNA from contamination, as discussed above.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

check the Massei-Mignini conspiracy theory thread

I found the comments relating to the charges and first level trial of the Monster of Florence case against Giuttari and Mignini; and I quote “In fact they nullified the whole trial, not only the previous one in terms of judgment, but also the preliminary hearing, and the indictment; and even the request of indictment. “
Were you aware of these developments with Monster of Florence?

CoulsdonUK,

This was discussed in another thread right here at JREFF last November. See Kaosium's comment, for example. What you presented was a half-truth, namely, the fact of the dismissal but not the reasons.
EDT
Your comments strike me as the converse of the typical authoritarian response, namely that if someone were convicted, he or she must be guilty. That PM Mignini's case was dismissed is separate from the question of his factual innocence or guilt.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Narducci swap

Halides1

Did you actually read the link? It's not an issue for me whether you have I only ask for clarification

Yes, I did. Same question back at you.

Here is something from the article that Yummi translated: "But… however… meanwhile, this [Naducci] corpse-swap was indeed found to have been for sure, a kind of unique case in the criminal history of the country. And, for what concerns the recent acquittals of those characters involved in this death, well, after almost a year and a half we are still waiting for the verdict motivations. All of the suspects were esteemed high-class professionals. That’s a perfect mix of strange deaths, sex, lead-astray investigations, and Masonry; this is in the city with the highest number of Masonic lodges in Italy."

Mignini had hypothesized that the body in Narducci's grave was not, in fact, Narducci. When the body was exhumed, it was shown to be Narducci's, and that is when talk of the body being swapped twice began IIUC. If the author that Yummi quoted believes in the double body switch (which apparently he does), that tells me a great deal about the quality of this article.

 

[Grinder]

Originally Posted by CoulsdonUK
I found the comments relating to the charges and first level trial of the Monster of Florence case against Giuttari and Mignini; and I quote “In fact they nullified the whole trial, not only the previous one in terms of judgment, but also the preliminary hearing, and the indictment; and even the request of indictment. “
Were you aware of these developments with Monster of Florence?

CoulsdonUK,

This was discussed in another thread right here at JREFF last November. See Kaosium's comment, for example. What you presented was a half-truth, namely, the fact of the dismissal but not the reasons.
EDT
Your comments strike me as the converse of the typical authoritarian response, namely that if someone were convicted, he or she must be guilty. That PM Mignini's case was dismissed is separate from the question of his factual innocence or guilt.

Coulsdon - This at least the second time that you have been informed recently here that the Mignini appeal's court decision wasn't not guilty but rather that the wrong venue had been used and the court assigned it to another venue. This is far different than the Hellmann court ruling not guilty on the merits of the case.

I will back you up whenever you are attacked unfairly but when you have made a point that isn't correct and you are given the facts I will ask you to admit to the facts.

Btw, whenever you use a Yummi translation or analysis be aware that he is on the far edge of the anti Amanda PGP.
__________________

 

[bookworm]

Coulsdon - This at least the second time that you have been informed recently here that the Mignini appeal's court decision wasn't not guilty but rather that the wrong venue had been used and the court assigned it to another venue. This is far different than the Hellmann court ruling not guilty on the merits of the case.

I will back you up whenever you are attacked unfairly but when you have made a point that isn't correct and you are given the facts I will ask you to admit to the facts.

Btw, whenever you use a Yummi translation or analysis be aware that he is on the far edge of the anti Amanda PGP.
__________________

Now this is something that really gets me. Why on earth would anyone who is discussing anything at all not acknowledge new information that has an impact on their position? The only answer I can come up with is that they refuse to consider anything that will shake their belief in any way. And that leads me to ask "Why are they bothering to discuss it if that's the case"? Any intelligent person who is discussing something acknowledges and processes new information about said issue and then incorporates said information into their argument. What I see here is that it's ignored like it was never even brought up.....?

 

[CoulsdonUK]

Coulsdon - This at least the second time that you have been informed recently here that the Mignini appeal's court decision wasn't not guilty but rather that the wrong venue had been used and the court assigned it to another venue. This is far different than the Hellmann court ruling not guilty on the merits of the case.

CoulsdonUK,
This was discussed in another thread right here at JREFF last November. See Kaosium's comment, for example. What you presented was a half-truth, namely, the fact of the dismissal but not the reasons.
EDT
Your comments strike me as the converse of the typical authoritarian response, namely that if someone were convicted, he or she must be guilty. That PM Mignini's case was dismissed is separate from the question of his factual innocence or guilt
I will back you up whenever you are attacked unfairly but when you have made a point that isn't correct and you are given the facts I will ask you to admit to the facts.
Btw, whenever you use a Yummi translation or analysis be aware that he is on the far edge of the anti Amanda PGP.

Grinder\Halides1

Firstly, please accept apologies for the delay in responding to your posts.

The following posts refer: #6855, #6867, #6871, #6874 and #6878.

I may have missed it but please point out where I use the term “not guilty” ?

Ok, so what do I have wrong based on the above posts?

Was the case against Mignini annulled or not?

Are there any charges against Mignini in relation to The Monster of Florence case?

I accept that the second level verdict of Raffaele and Amanda, they were acquitted subject to confirmation by the Supreme Court.

I read posts here IA, PMF .net and .org and occasionally TJMK, what is obvious to me is that individuals from these sites have developed strong negative opinions (understatement) of each other and generally make similar observations of each other, I do find this entire name calling tiresome but there it is! I read comments from Halides1, Charlie Wilkes, Grinder and say Bill Williams by the same token I will read posts from Capeadlin, Ergon, Stilicho and others I regard this as being open minded.

I am content to apologies but I am not sure what I have said that requires one.

 

[Grinder]

Please If possible provide the current status of any legal proceedings against Mignini in Florence.

As far as we know it is sitting waiting for them to decide whether to appeal to the Corte Suprema di Cassazione or move the case to another venue.

Is Mignini like Raffaele and Amanda innocent until proven guilty or are you applying different legal rulings.

Perhaps this was the remark that makes it seem you believe Mignin was found not guilty. You see Mignini was found guilty but no court found him not guilty while a court did find A & R not guilty. So just as A & R were guilty after the first trial so is Mignini. For me he will remain convicted until a court finds on the merits that he isn't. Same standards as A & R.

I do find this entire name calling tiresome but there it is! I read comments from Halides1, Charlie Wilkes, Grinder and say Bill Williams by the same token I will read posts from Capeadlin, Ergon, Stilicho and others I regard this as being open minded.

Forum rules prevent me from making comments about half individuals you mentioned. If you find those mentioned from the PGP side equal to those from the PIP side and those few of us that aren't fully in either camp, that is your choice. At least three of the four from this site attempt to back their postings with cites and facts.

One of your sources is currently waving away the investigation into Monica Napoleoni.

It is more important and significant to me that Mignini was even charged with a crime by another prosecutor and the police than anything done by Frank. Now I think Frank's credibility is at issue but pale next to a prosecutor that had this reputation before Meredith.

 

[Grinder]

This article from Perugia gives a much different report on Monica Napoleoni then reported on another site.

My Google read of it makes it appear that she had her officers find the car of a psychologist that had not agreed with her desires about placement of her kids. I'm totally hoping someone here can do a good job of translating.

The psychologist had her tire slashed and a note was left referring to her as a whore - hmmmm that does sound like old Monica Napoleoni.

hope someone can do justice to the article. Taking the law into her own hands hmmmm.