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

[RWVBWL]

Hit the books, Doctor!

UNBELIEVABLE!!!! From my perspective that makes the bra clasp even more suspect.

These so called scientific police aren't what I would call scientists
<snip>

Photo's of DR. Patrizia Stefannoni always bothered me,


especially when the 2nd trial came up,
and it became known that the the Doctor did not know how to properly store a very crucial, controversial piece of evidence,
the bra clasp you mention!

Me thinks that the Doctor should maybe spend less time getting her hair done,
and spend more time reading scientific journals, for cryin' out loud!

The Bra Clasp was stored in a plastic bag and is now completely un-testable?
I'm only a Venice High School graduate,
but I've even learned, just from reading here on The JREF,
that The Bra Clasp should have been stored in a paper envelope.
WTFudge!

 

[acbytesla]

I can agree that corruption is not unique to Italy. But I must add that it appears to be more vertical and endemic in their system. I cant imagine another country attempting to make such a weak case into something. But not just that ...it is the fact that it is so wide spread. Even the Italian SC is willing to break its own laws and mandates that I would guess must be set out in their constitution.

The European Court Of Human Rights looks at complaints of all signature countries which happens to include Italy. They have charged Italy with more violations of failing to provide a fair trial than any other signature country. And the difference is vast. Not a minor variation but a gross and sicking number of violations that outpaces normal countries like Spain and Russia by wide margins. For example in a described time period Italy has 2,012 violations against human rights by it's courts while in the same time period Russia has 350 violations. That is something that should shame Italy into compliance with human rights regulations but which in fact doesn't seem to bother them at all.

There appears to be no will to even investigate the corruption and abuse. The judiciary has been granted all the power and they clearly intend to abuse it without impunity.

Honest judges are leaving in droves ...ashamed to deal inside the system anymore. And no politician is willing to risk the harassment by investigating the police and judiciary. No system of checks and balances.

Absolute power! And we all know the conclusion of being granted that much unregulated power... it can only be absolute corruption. And this is what we are witnessing in this case.

Perhaps corruption is not isolated to Italy...but it seems to be infected from the lowest courts up to and including the SC. And oddly we don't need to go into depth of the evidence or facts...we can see the abuse just in reading the motivation reports.

I thought Massei was the dumbest judge on earth...until I read the ISC report. They are truly candidates for the kings of woo....so bold so as to clearly bypass and ignore their own mandates. And who will stop them? No one it appears.

It so hard to understand why they would double down on this. It seems as if they are trying to win through attrition. The legal costs for Amanda and Raffaele must be enormous. And this case has the potential to drag on for as long as a decade before it is resolved. I'm not sure when the case will be heard in Florence, then it's back to the ISC for approval or ratification. Consider the following.. (I could be wrong about all of this) Say the case is heard 18 months from now in Florence, they take Italy's usual 6 months to try the case. Say Amanda and Raffaele are found innocent again, and it goes back to the ISC. 16 months after that they could in theory over rule Florence and demand another trial. This court...God forbid, they find the kids guilty again, and then it heads back to the ISC, They finally get what they wanted and then are they going to seek extradition? And God only knows how long that could last.

 

[acbytesla]

Photo's of DR. Patrizia Stefannoni always bothered me,
[qimg]http://imageshack.us/scaled/medium/41/26zq.jpg[/qimg]

especially when the 2nd trial came up,
and it became known that the the Doctor did not know how to properly store a very crucial, controversial piece of evidence,
the bra clasp you mention!

Me thinks that the Doctor should maybe spend less time getting her hair done,
and spend more time reading scientific journals, for cryin' out loud!

The Bra Clasp was stored in a plastic bag and is now completely un-testable?
I'm only a Venice High School graduate,
but I've even learned, just from reading here on The JREF,
that The Bra Clasp should have been stored in a paper envelope.
WTFudge!

There is no way to verify Stefanoni's work. NO WAY at all. All there is are these egrams which could be made with Photoshop. NO RAW DATA at all. I'm guessing the EDFs will never be produced, because they don't exist. The knife is useless. Remember, it was tested by C&V and they found nothing. The bra clasp which surfaced in the most bizarre way. Remember the stupid show they made of collecting that one piece of evidence?

How can the people trust the outcome of it's judicial system with this kind of absurdity?

 

[codyjuneau]

.
RWVBWL gave a link to this paragraph from Perugia Shock:

Last Friday there was a get-together at the house of horrors.
All of the sudden the lawyers got a call from the police and had to go there. Some things had to be seized, which is why the presence of the parties was necessary.
Among the items seized: Meredith's purse, Meredith's guitar, Amanda's guitar, the 2 Harry Potter books, a hair-dryer, a little pot of vaseline, a sweatshirt, etc. It seems that all of this seized stuff will be tested in light of some clues provided by a witness.

.
What did this witness say to require siezing such a diverse collection of items? Did this witness ever testify in court? Could this 'witness' have been nothing more than an excuse to return for the bra clasp?
.

 

[anglolawyer]

Photo's of DR. Patrizia Stefannoni always bothered me,
[qimg]http://imageshack.us/scaled/medium/41/26zq.jpg[/qimg]

especially when the 2nd trial came up,
and it became known that the the Doctor did not know how to properly store a very crucial, controversial piece of evidence,
the bra clasp you mention!

Me thinks that the Doctor should maybe spend less time getting her hair done,
and spend more time reading scientific journals, for cryin' out loud!

The Bra Clasp was stored in a plastic bag and is now completely un-testable?
I'm only a Venice High School graduate,
but I've even learned, just from reading here on The JREF,
that The Bra Clasp should have been stored in a paper envelope.
WTFudge!

While we're on the subject, I'd like to understand the thought process (if any) behind leaving the clasp lying around on the floor for weeks, along with much of the blood-covered clothing of the victim. I'm no detective but I would have thought that after the body itself (how close did she come to leaving that behind? ) wouldn't the clothes come somewhere high up the list? Incompetence, corruption. Corruption, incompetence. It can be hard to spot the difference sometimes.

How many murder cases had she had before?

 

[RWVBWL]

The Hickey...

The PGP say that no hickey looks like her mark and they giddily speculate on Meredith scratching her as a last act.

So you disagree that Meredith scratched Amanda, that's progress. You then agree had Meredith would have had AK's DNA under her nail
<snip>

Sherlock, in the grand scheme of things none of this matters but I'm going to try this one, one more time.

Many PGP have speculated that Meredith fought back and many have speculated that she caused Amanda to bleed and leave a drop on the sink. Some say she gave her a nosebleed while others question the hickey and say it really was an injury caused by Meredith. This has been a subject at .org for the last couple of days again.

The DNA would be under Meredith's fingernails. When someone scratches someone else with their fingernails DNA is left under the scratcher's fingernail. They have torn the skin of their target and it would have some end up under the nail as well as the blood.

This isn't touch DNA. This isn't "normal" transfer. This is as close to mandatory as possible.

The only way that DNA isn't there is if her hands were cleaned thoroughly. The PGP, as often is the case, didn't think through their scenario.

Hi all,
I wasn't around for The Hickey discussion,
but I would like to chime in too, cool?

Anyways,
I've always thought that The Hickey photo,
the 1 that Dan O' reposted a few days ago, did look a bit odd:


That is because the shot does not give the complete picture,
as you can see below, which shows its location:



I was curious about what the real story is, have a read below,
it seems like the Perugia cops did not even really give a hoot about Amanda's wound, err hickey until 10 months later!
And the thing healed up nicely, gone in about 4 days,
it didn't even scab, apparently...

Monday, Feb. 16, 2009
Queen of Smiles
Laura's testimony and the scratch

But the queen of smiles has been Amanda's housemate Laura Mezzetti, another almost-lawyer, who looked liked showing all her happiness for being once again in front of her favorite prosecutor and virtually legal mentor. Many smiles but no clues of guiltiness for her, though.
Laura confirmed Filomena's version about the relationship between Meredith and Amanda, just some discussion about cleaning. Same for the conversation on the money. She was particularly struck by Raffaele's affection for Amanda, defined as obsessive and annoying.

But we knew a new element was awaited from her since she's the one who remembered that Amanda had a scratch on her neck on November 2 she didn't have on the previous day.
The almost-lawyer would keep this detail reserved during 10 months of intense relations with the Pm and his soldiers. Her illumination occurred in September 2008 on the road not to Damascus but to Montefiascone, that's when she revealed the detail to Stefano Bonassi and his girlfriend, explaining that you can see it online, on a photographer picture outside the house.

{Note: See photo of AK+RS that I posted above}

But she would still consider the detail irrelevant and did not bother to report it to the police. A few weeks later Bonassi, transferred by the police to testify for the pre -trial, would ask them about the scratch. The Police, always very attentive to such yummy clues against the suspects, would refer to the Pm, who welcomed the detail as an important clue of guiltiness. Mezzetti justified the secret so jealously kept with the fact she thought they would have noticed. After her description of the scratch, in the hearing, she was shown the photograph that she knew so well and she recognized the scratch as the one she saw, even if actually the description she had just provided --of a long scrape along the jugular-- was different from the mark, more round and set in a central position. Coroner pictures after Amanda's arrest were also shown in the hearing revealing that in 4 days the mark had almost disappeared. In short, it seems nothing important since the mark looks more like a hickey and, for position and nature, doesn't look like a fight wound at all. The dearest housemate should have another illumination on the road of internet and find another picture of Amanda's neck in the day before without a mark. That could at least dignify this element a little bit.

There was none of Amanda's DNA found under Miss Kercher's fingernails, correct?
That sure looks like a hickey to me.
You?

 

[Mary_H]

While we're on the subject, I'd like to understand the thought process (if any) behind leaving the clasp lying around on the floor for weeks, along with much of the blood-covered clothing of the victim. I'm no detective but I would have thought that after the body itself (how close did she come to leaving that behind? ) wouldn't the clothes come somewhere high up the list? Incompetence, corruption. Corruption, incompetence. It can be hard to spot the difference sometimes.

How many murder cases had she had before?

I am certain they collected the bra clasp on the first pass and then took it back to the cottage for its screen test in December. Both Massei and the Supreme Court describe where the clasp was originally located -- under the cushion that was under Meredith. Obviously they had either a photo of it in its original location, or they had it catalogued in a list. It would not have taken them six weeks to realize it was missing from the items they had collected from the room -- they would have been checking and cross-checking that stuff constantly in the first couple weeks after the crime. If one of the numbered pieces of evidence were missing, they would have gone back for it right away. There is no reason anyway to think they would not have bagged a numbered, photographed piece of evidence -- it's ridiculous.

They picked up a couple of other pieces of evidence that day in December, but did they film themselves doing it? Why would it be important to film themselves examining the bra clasp so closely if they didn't already know they needed to show its importance? Why put the bra clasp on the floor and take pictures of it there as if to say that was where it was found, while also claiming it was found under a rug under the desk?

If they had not lost Raffaele's shoes as their only bit of evidence against him, they would not have had to come up with another piece. Props to them for actually realizing the bra clasp would be more incriminating than anything else.

 

[acbytesla]

Room looks spotless compared to Filomenas room. And please save me the staged break-in mess. Who thinks they messed up the desk and table piling it with tons of crap makeup and nail polish just to make her appear to be a slob?

I still think Filomena and her BF make better suspects than RS and AK. Filomena made Knox call police knowing full well she had a bare minimum use of the Italian language. Plus she clearly lied about closing her shutters and glass on top. Then there was that whole removing evidence thing that I think happened after the murder was discovered.

Did the police even take representative footprint samples from the Italian chicks? I don't think so.............

From my knowledge they didn't take DNA swabs from them either.

I agree with you that Filomena might make a better suspect. And I think she lawyered up pretty much immediately but she's only a better suspect by a hair. We all know that Rudy committed this crime. Maybe he had a friend involved which I seriously doubt was Filomena.

But your point is well taken. All of Italy is second guessing all of Amanda's behavior, and taking everyone else's behavior at face value.

 

[RWVBWL]

It's a small world...

Man,
I still learn something new every day about this case we disuss!

Check this out,
ya know the store owner Marco Quintavalle,
who when questioned by the cops after MIss Kercher was slain,
said that he did not see Raff or Amanda there?

But a year later, after I guess it was, having,
(no not lawyering up+speaking with an attorney, like 2 of Amanda's housemates did),
spoken with a newspaper reporter, he did recall seeing Amanda and her vivid blue eyes
waiting outside for his store to open and then she went to the cleaning section to buy bleach, supposedly, right?


Weird how his memory was sooo much clearer a year later, no?

Anyways, he had a gal working with him in his store that morning, and I recall that she said in court that AK did not enter the store that day, defintely contradicting her boss, wonder if she still works there?


But I never knew that she had also been
The Cleaning Lady at Raffaele's rented flat!
Small world!

Marina Chiriboga didn't receive the call to the stand, she had changed address. But today they found her and they brought her to the courtroom. The beautiful Latina had been cleaning at Raffaele's place as long as her pregnancy allowed her, and she was also working at the infamous Conad store owned by the genius of memory Marco Quintavalle.

If you have a moment, read the article that I've linked below.
Who do you believe, the saleswoman/pregnant cleaning lady or the store owner who finally remembers a year later?

Link:
http://web.archive.org/web/20091203....blogspot.com/2009/06/chiriboga-at-stand.html

 

[anglolawyer]

I am certain they collected the bra clasp on the first pass and then took it back to the cottage for its screen test in December. Both Massei and the Supreme Court describe where the clasp was originally located -- under the cushion that was under Meredith. Obviously they had either a photo of it in its original location, or they had it catalogued in a list. It would not have taken them six weeks to realize it was missing from the items they had collected from the room -- they would have been checking and cross-checking that stuff constantly in the first couple weeks after the crime. If one of the numbered pieces of evidence were missing, they would have gone back for it right away. There is no reason anyway to think they would not have bagged a numbered, photographed piece of evidence -- it's ridiculous.

They picked up a couple of other pieces of evidence that day in December, but did they film themselves doing it? Why would it be important to film themselves examining the bra clasp so closely if they didn't already know they needed to show its importance? Why put the bra clasp on the floor and take pictures of it there as if to say that was where it was found, while also claiming it was found under a rug under the desk?

If they had not lost Raffaele's shoes as their only bit of evidence against him, they would not have had to come up with another piece. Props to them for actually realizing the bra clasp would be more incriminating than anything else.

Oh, Mary, Mary, quite contrary sometimes, aren't we ? They did indeed film themselves retrieving other items on 18 Dec including IIRC the handbag from which Rudy stole her phones and keys and who knows what, and her outer garment, covered in blood with its sleeves pulled inside out, proving that she was stabbed while still wearing it and it was removed after the attack. Both items had Rudy's DNA on them. I think also her socks and I am sure other stuff. I know coz I watched the movie. The jacket had been tossed in some kind of hamper to get nicely mingled up with other stuff and the bag may have been left amid the great jumble of stuff that had been tossed willy nilly on the mattressless bed.

Although it is not easy to tell, due to the face masks (perhaps this is why they were wearing them) I detected no sign of embarrassment and this makes me pause and wonder - are they really that dumb? Maybe.

 

[Mary_H]

Oh, Mary, Mary, quite contrary sometimes, aren't we ? They did indeed film themselves retrieving other items on 18 Dec including IIRC the handbag from which Rudy stole her phones and keys and who knows what, and her outer garment, covered in blood with its sleeves pulled inside out, proving that she was stabbed while still wearing it and it was removed after the attack. Both items had Rudy's DNA on them. I think also her socks and I am sure other stuff. I know coz I watched the movie. The jacket had been tossed in some kind of hamper to get nicely mingled up with other stuff and the bag may have been left amid the great jumble of stuff that had been tossed willy nilly on the mattressless bed.

Although it is not easy to tell, due to the face masks (perhaps this is why they were wearing them) I detected no sign of embarrassment and this makes me pause and wonder - are they really that dumb? Maybe.

Well, if you saw the movie, then who am I to argue.

When you say "face masks," do you mean bunny suits?

 

[anglolawyer]

Well, if you saw the movie, then who am I to argue.

Who indeed.

When you say "face masks," do you mean bunny suits?

Yes.

 

[Grinder]

Hello, I'd like to comment a bit on this. It is true that there is a stuctural problem in Italy's judicial system but I think that it's not exactly with the use of a inquisitorial system. It is well known that there is a problem with excessive independency/lack of accountability of the judicial branch. It's not exactly strange that this creates the conditions for abuse of power, corruption and institutional bias, as the role of the intitution becomes self-preservation and aggrandizement.

Another problem that I suspect exists as well, is an excessive influence of traditionalist currents of thought, and maybe a general despise for empirical based knowledge. All of this is related, in my opinion, to the philosophical roots of catholic southern european though, which has its most recognizable form in France.

This is why you get this discourse where preference is given to form over substance and a need to obfuscate instead of clarify. Hence the use of meaningless words like "osmotic" that are used just to make the text look more "intelligent".

Thanks, interesting.

Oh, Mary, Mary, quite contrary sometimes, aren't we ? They did indeed film themselves retrieving other items on 18 Dec including IIRC the handbag from which Rudy stole her phones and keys and who knows what, and her outer garment, covered in blood with its sleeves pulled inside out, proving that she was stabbed while still wearing it and it was removed after the attack. Both items had Rudy's DNA on them. I think also her socks and I am sure other stuff. I know coz I watched the movie. The jacket had been tossed in some kind of hamper to get nicely mingled up with other stuff and the bag may have been left amid the great jumble of stuff that had been tossed willy nilly on the mattressless bed.

Although it is not easy to tell, due to the face masks (perhaps this is why they were wearing them) I detected no sign of embarrassment and this makes me pause and wonder - are they really that dumb? Maybe.

I recall that it has been reported that the visit in December had to be cleared and coordinated with the defense team. I do not have a cite for this off-hand.

The defense was outside in a van watching the ICSI do their work and that's why they showed things on camera. This doesn't completely explain all their behavior but...

 

[anglolawyer]

I recall that it has been reported that the visit in December had to be cleared and coordinated with the defense team. I do not have a cite for this off-hand.

The defense was outside in a van watching the ICSI do their work and that's why they showed things on camera. This doesn't completely explain all their behavior but...

Yes, I am aware of this wrinkle. Still, before the lawyers get involved there is the small matter of the investigation (without which the lawyers have no idea what they are supposed to be doing) in which, I'm only guessing here, the idea is to figure out what happened. Is taking the body away while dumping everything else in a jumbled heap on the bed (including clothes, items from which desirable objects may have been removed etc) the normal way of doing these things? This is certainly not how Columbo does it, which is a major alarm bell so far as I'm concerned.

ETA did anyone notice that Amanda solved the crime within a couple of days? Not who did it but what happened. It's in her book.

 

[Grinder]

Yes, I am aware of this wrinkle. Still, before the lawyers get involved there is the small matter of the investigation (without which the lawyers have no idea what they are supposed to be doing) in which, I'm only guessing here, the idea is to figure out what happened. Is taking the body away while dumping everything else in a jumbled heap on the bed (including clothes, items from which desirable objects may have been removed etc) the normal way of doing these things? This is certainly not how Columbo does it, which is a major alarm bell so far as I'm concerned.

Re the highlighted part: are you trying to get coverage over at .org? Missing Jackie?

You know very well that I was speaking only about the "movie" of the collection. I have long maintained that the bulk of the issues are due to incompetence, certainly at the beginning. For example, had there been a message on Amanda's phone from Patrick when the police looked at it that fateful night, it would have been erased by mistake not on purpose.

ETA did anyone notice that Amanda solved the crime within a couple of days? Not who did it but what happened. It's in her book.

Do tell.

 

[Bill Williams]

Oh, Mary, Mary, quite contrary sometimes, aren't we ? They did indeed film themselves retrieving other items on 18 Dec including IIRC the handbag from which Rudy stole her phones and keys and who knows what, and her outer garment, covered in blood with its sleeves pulled inside out, proving that she was stabbed while still wearing it and it was removed after the attack. Both items had Rudy's DNA on them. I think also her socks and I am sure other stuff. I know coz I watched the movie. The jacket had been tossed in some kind of hamper to get nicely mingled up with other stuff and the bag may have been left amid the great jumble of stuff that had been tossed willy nilly on the mattressless bed.

Although it is not easy to tell, due to the face masks (perhaps this is why they were wearing them) I detected no sign of embarrassment and this makes me pause and wonder - are they really that dumb? Maybe.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, I go to bed last night wondering why Machiavelli won't even talk about when Amanda's clothes were collected, you know - the ones which some claim were not collected until four months after the horrible crime?

And then AngloLawyer, Mary H, and Grinder are all over themselves with all the other stuff the PLE did not collect. But at least THAT stuff was collected only weeks' later; making the collection of the bra-clasp and Meredith's bloody jacket look like the PLE were actually competent compared to Amanda's clothes!

If I were the Kercher's, I'd angry as blazes. It looks like the PLE and Mr. Mignini thought that the two young people were going to crack well before any of that stuff, you know EVIDENCE!, would be needed.

Every once in a while I am reminded that all this is worse than I had thought. No wonder Machiavelli wants to consider the collection of Amanda's clothes osmotically. I'm beginning to think that when "osmotic" is used in Italian juridical discourse, it means, "I haven't a clue how this item fits in, but consider for a minute that they are guilty, and I'm sure we can fit it in somewhere!"

There are some things which Machiavelli, anyway, simply will not talk about by its onsey. And I now know why.

 

[Grinder]

I'm pretty sure that the ICSI didn't collect all or most of the clothes lying around in Filomena's or Laura's room either on the 2nd and 3rd. The ISCI didn't apparently look at the roommates as suspects during the time they were collecting evidence.

I don't remember how they would have known that those were the clothes Amanda had been wearing the murder night but will be happy to be informed.

As it turned out there wasn't anything to find on them so the ISCI's instincts seemed to be correct.

One of Massei's points about why to believe Stefanoni's work on the knife is that if they were faking the evidence she could have put enough on to make the test work using normal testing and in enough abundance to allow multiple tests. I don't think that Stefanoni faked the results but rather pushed every limit including the interpretation. If they wanted to frame the kids they could have just done it.

This leads to question as to why they didn't drop just a little of Meredith's blood on Amanda's clothes left on the bed.

 

[anglolawyer]

Re the highlighted part: are you trying to get coverage over at .org? Missing Jackie?

I am always missing Jackie. I need to improve my aim.

You know very well that I was speaking only about the "movie" of the collection. I have long maintained that the bulk of the issues are due to incompetence, certainly at the beginning. For example, had there been a message on Amanda's phone from Patrick when the police looked at it that fateful night, it would have been erased by mistake not on purpose.

LOL - bait not taken. We know there was such a message - De Felice said so as reliably reported by the guy who got promoted to China for his work.

Do tell.

I don't have the book handy and my detailed and penetrating annotations were all wiped out when I 'upgraded' the OS on the iPad but - she records hypothesising what might have happened and first thinking the burglar had broken in after Meredith was already there, but wondering why she wouldn't have heard the window break, before going on to consider the idea that he was already there when she got home which, as we all know, is exactly what happened.

 

[anglolawyer]

I'm pretty sure that the ICSI didn't collect all or most of the clothes lying around in Filomena's or Laura's room either on the 2nd and 3rd. The ISCI didn't apparently look at the roommates as suspects during the time they were collecting evidence.

I don't remember how they would have known that those were the clothes Amanda had been wearing the murder night but will be happy to be informed.
As it turned out there wasn't anything to find on them so the ISCI's instincts seemed to be correct.

One of Massei's points about why to believe Stefanoni's work on the knife is that if they were faking the evidence she could have put enough on to make the test work using normal testing and in enough abundance to allow multiple tests. I don't think that Stefanoni faked the results but rather pushed every limit including the interpretation. If they wanted to frame the kids they could have just done it.

This leads to question as to why they didn't drop just a little of Meredith's blood on Amanda's clothes left on the bed.

I know how they could have known. They could ask Amanda: what clothes were you wearing the night of the murder?

 

[Grinder]

I don't have the book handy and my detailed and penetrating annotations were all wiped out when I 'upgraded' the OS on the iPad but - she records hypothesising what might have happened and first thinking the burglar had broken in after Meredith was already there, but wondering why she wouldn't have heard the window break, before going on to consider the idea that he was already there when she got home which, as we all know, is exactly what happened.

Which the bunny lovers would say is because she staged the break-in with the burglary gone bad as the scenario created.

I know how they could have known. They could ask Amanda: what clothes were you wearing the night of the murder?

Okay, fine, but they wouldn't have known that until after the ICSI left, correct?

At least if consistent with them not asking about the murder night from the beginning as I have maintained. Actually even though they were testing the kids alibi from early on, asking about what they wore would have tipped the kids off to being suspects.

I doubt they knew what they wore until later. Why didn't they take all her clothes and test them as she, the wily devil, would have left innocent clothes out while putting the blood splattered clothes in a garbage can down the street.

Has anyone ever seen any reporting or anything that indicates the police went through all the garbage cans and asked residents to check their cans for disposed evidence?