Continuation Part 5: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

[Chris_Halkides]

more thoughts on presumptive and confirmatory testing for blood

I don't have time to do this subject full justice today. But interested readers can click here and here as a good beginning. Stefanoni herself used a confirmatory test on Rep. 199 from Filomena's window area. From the second link: "Extracts are made from stained areas of interest, and from nearby unstained areas (substrate controls). Note that the use of unstained controls is a fundamental principle in forensic immunologic testing." IMO this sort of substrate control is never a bad idea.

Other types of controls can also be run, "When a blood presumptive test is done at a crime or accident scene, an investigator must include the use of controls to ensure the accuracy of the result. This is because a blood presumptive test can be subject to what is known as a false positive result. This is when the characteristic color reaction is produced by a sample that is in fact not blood. As well, a false negative reaction is possible, where for some reason a blood sample does not produce the characteristic color change in the indicator chemical.
"Standard procedures can rule out the possibility of a false positive or negative result. However, if these controls are not run, then the accuracy of the presumptive test can be questioned. In that case, the results would not be admissible in a court of law.
"Presumptive blood tests are commercially available in a convenient form that is easily transportable to the crime or accident scene...Other containers contain the positive and negative controls."

This presentation from North Carolina also has some interesting material:

"Defenders must obtain the underlying notes and reports of the analyst
Defenders should raise a challenge where:
Only a presumptive test was done
The mandated combination of tests was not done
Testing protocol was not followed"

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the full text of the second memoriale

Yes, it is shocking that someone locked up for 4 years can't shed light on what happened that night.

Ah, but she can in one sense. The full text of the second memoriale is there, and it is a couple of pages in length. Of course, everything in it concerns her evening with Sollecito at his flat, but it does demolish the complaint that she can't give a detailed account of herself that evening. As for the business about the court of cassation, that sort of argument about what I would have expected from an authoritarian like Follain.

 

[bolint]

Some was overwritten while Raffaele was in police custody 2:47 AM, November 6th, right about when Raffaele said he was arrested in his book. That it happened is undisputed even by Massei

As it is clearly written in the Massei excerpt you cited the Stardust file was in the shared P2P folder, so any outer download modifies its access timestamp. That's a much more plausible explanation than some police Catwoman entering his room and changing the timestamp.

After seeing Meredith for the last time, Raffaele downloaded Amelie

OK Amélie.
Let's see what Amanda says about it.

Sometime between 4 P.M. and 5 P.M., we left to go to his place. We wanted a quiet, cozy night in. As we walked along, I was telling Raffaele that Amélie was my all-time favorite movie.“Really?” he asked. “I’ve never seen it.”“Oh my God,” I said, unbelieving. “You have to see it right this second! You’ll love it!”

Not long after we got back to Raffaele’s, his doorbell rang. (... Popovic visit cut ...)
As soon as she left, we downloaded the movie on his computer and sat on his bed to watch it.

You see the problem?

(I'll answer the rest of your post tomorrow)

 

[bolint]

She's now a convicted liar according to the Italy's highest court. That fact and her book may play an important part in the upcoming legal proceedings.

She? It was a he.
But the explanation was not much different, indeed.

 

[anglolawyer]

As it is clearly written in the Massei excerpt you cited the Stardust file was in the shared P2P folder, so any outer download modifies its access timestamp. That's a much more plausible explanation than some police Catwoman entering his room and changing the timestamp.




OK Amélie.
Let's see what Amanda says about it.


You see the problem?

(I'll answer the rest of your post tomorrow)

I think I see it. She seems to be unable to construct a narrative that is not internally contradictory or which does not contradict an earlier version. IMO she should not be trying. She should just say she was there the whole evening and night, that she remembers some things that happened but is unable to say in what order nor at what time they happened. As there is no evidence of her involvement in the murder, trying to satisfy unreasonable expectations like yours only exposes her to unfair micro-analysis.

 

[Mary_H]

I think I see it. She seems to be unable to construct a narrative that is not internally contradictory or which does not contradict an earlier version. IMO she should not be trying. She should just say she was there the whole evening and night, that she remembers some things that happened but is unable to say in what order nor at what time they happened. As there is no evidence of her involvement in the murder, trying to satisfy unreasonable expectations like yours only exposes her to unfair micro-analysis.

I don't see the problem. What is it?

 

[anglolawyer]

I don't see the problem. What is it?

She can't arrange the events coherently. Was dinner early or late, before or after Popovic? What time did they watch Amelie etc etc. When did the pipe burst. If we use her and Raffaele's accounts over time as the sole test they are definitely guilty of murder.

ETA for instance. She says they left around 4-5 p.m. and straightaway watched Amelie. In the book she says Amelie finished at 9.15. So what? It lasted 4 hours?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Late afternoon and early evening

She can't arrange the events coherently. Was dinner early or late, before or after Popovic? What time did they watch Amelie etc etc. When did the pipe burst. If we use her and Raffaele's accounts over time as the sole test they are definitely guilty of murder.

Well, Popovic came over twice, so one has to factor that into one's interpretation of their accounts.

 

[Mary_H]

She can't arrange the events coherently. Was dinner early or late, before or after Popovic? What time did they watch Amelie etc etc. When did the pipe burst. If we use her and Raffaele's accounts over time as the sole test they are definitely guilty of murder.

ETA for instance. She says they left around 4-5 p.m. and straightaway watched Amelie. In the book she says Amelie finished at 9.15. So what? It lasted 4 hours?

Chris beat me to the punch. Popovic came over twice, as well as some other details. If you read the entire excerpt on pages 61-62, there is no discrepancy.

 

[anglolawyer]

Well, Popovic came over twice, so one has to factor that into one's interpretation of their accounts.

Sure. But in the second memoriale she puts dinner before the exchange of texts with Patrick, not expressly but in the order in which she writes things down, whereas in her book she has dinner happening after Amelie finishes at 9.15.

I am sure if I could be bothered (I can't) I could find loads of this stuff. In Honor Bound Raffaele suggests or says Amanda learned of her roommates' and the boys downstairs plans to be away for the weekend on the morning of 01 Nov but in her account she appears not to know anything of the kind when returning the next morning to find the door open etc.

 

[anglolawyer]

Chris beat me to the punch. Popovic came over twice, as well as some other details. If you read the entire excerpt on pages 61-62, there is no discrepancy.

I was not referring to Popovic.

 

[Mary_H]

I was not referring to Popovic.

Oh well. As you said, "As there is no evidence of her involvement in the murder, trying to satisfy unreasonable expectations like yours only exposes her to unfair micro-analysis."

ETA: "yours" meaning bolint's, not anglolawyer's

 

[Grinder]

No the problem is she said they looked forward to a cozy night in when at that time she was scheduled to work and Raf was scheduled to go to the bus station.

Sometime between 4 P.M. and 5 P.M., we left to go to his place. We wanted a quiet, cozy night in. As we walked along, I was telling Raffaele that Amélie was my all-time favorite movie.“Really?” he asked. “I’ve never seen it.”“Oh my God,” I said, unbelieving. “You have to see it right this second! You’ll love it!”

Now to Bolint and the nit-pickers of things not directly related to the murder, I say she didn't say they planned to have a cozy evening she said they wanted to have a cozy evening. Also she said right this second and yet they waited to watch it.

I'm sure that kind of parsing will not be permitted by the PGP.

 

[anglolawyer]

No the problem is she said they looked forward to a cozy night in when at that time she was scheduled to work and Raf was scheduled to go to the bus station.



Now to Bolint and the nit-pickers of things not directly related to the murder, I say she didn't say they planned to have a cozy evening she said they wanted to have a cozy evening. Also she said right this second and yet they waited to watch it.

I'm sure that kind of parsing will not be permitted by the PGP.

Ah, but she also said she forgot she was working that night, so she could have planned a cozy evening due to an understandable lapse of memory. Once you get into all these lies a clear picture of a calculating murder (sic) emerges.

 

[Mary_H]

Ah, but she also said she forgot she was working that night, so she could have planned a cozy evening due to an understandable lapse of memory. Once you get into all these lies a clear picture of a calculating murder (sic) emerges.

Amanda was a murderess. Raffaele was a murder.

 

[Grinder]

Amanda was a murderess. Raffaele was a murder.

murdess (sic) ™

 

[Mary_H]

murdess (sic) ™

Thank you.

 

[Katody Matrass]

ETA for instance. She says they left around 4-5 p.m. and straightaway watched Amelie. In the book she says Amelie finished at 9.15. So what? It lasted 4 hours?

She says in the book they downloaded the movie after Popovic left. Do you have any idea how much time it usually took to download a film in 2007?

 

[anglolawyer]

She says in the book they downloaded the movie after Popovic left. Do you have any idea how much time it usually took to download a film in 2007?

No. Could you watch while it's downloading?

Raffaele says the film was interrupted several times if that helps. Of course Amanda does not mention this. In the book, they get home at 5, Jovana comes round right after that, they straightaway download the film and watch it. She mentions no gaps, no checking of emails and no reading Harry Potter. The last two are in the second memoriale.

So how long is the film? Google says 123 minutes. 5.00 p.m. to 9.15 p.m. is 255 minutes.

 

[Katody Matrass]

No. Could you watch while it's downloading?

Not with p2p. You need to wait for the download to finish.

Raffaele says the film was interrupted several times if that helps. Of course Amanda does not mention this.

Oh, come on. I have the kindle book at hand. She does mention pausing the film.

In the book, they get home at 5, Jovana comes round right after that, they straightaway download the film and watch it. She mentions no gaps, no checking of emails and no reading Harry Potter.

She does mention reading Harry Potter, too.