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

[RandyN]

Why do you think that?

Because it is ominous!

 

[Machiavelli]

Geez Mach, you're wrong again. All the wines I have in my wine collection are Italian (and maybe a couple Australian). The ones from the fruits of my orchard, the ones which taste like my home, are substandard in comparison to the wines of Italy. And that is a fact!

Well, it's possible

But I can only speak about the few "foreign" things I was offerend and tasted, which I did appreciate. When I was in Ma'aloula in Sirya I did appreciate the wine produced by the monks. When in Spain I like to drink Spanish wine. I can't say they are all sub-standard. However, we all know that most wines of the wolrd are sub-standard.
I live in Emilia-Romagna but I don't like very much most wines from Emilia-Romagna (they grow Sangiovese and Cabernet mostly; Pignoletto here is better imho); I was born in Padova (albeit never lived there) and right where I was born they produce one of my favourites, the Raboso delle Corti Benedettine: I guess they don't drink something like that in many other places around the world.

 

[RandyN]

No no no, again it's your strain. You know Micheli mentioned a number of "themes"; this is a fact, something that belongs to Micheli's statment. It is also a fact that Micheli stated that the prosecution did not repeat these themes any more. This is a second fact (the fact is that this is stated by Micheli too).
A third fact, is that these themes are present in Mignini's speech, but they are not a description of a ritual murder. Moreover, the word "rito" is actually missing in Mignini's speech (maybe Micheli says "riti" meaning the ritual holidays - Halloween, Celtic day, Day of Seints, Day of the Deads - enlisted in Mighini's paragraph). It is a fact that despite "themes" are mentioned, Mignini's speech does not describe any ritual murder, but describes instead just a drug-fueled party between young students in which a sex-game-gone-awry scenario took place, and these themes (linked to manga comics, possible cultural suggestions, strange individual charachters, Halloween as an "occasion" to have Meredith alone) are merely secondary, contextual elements "attached" to this scenario. They do not turn the murder into a ritual murder, they are only speculation on what "style" the drug-fueled party and sex-hazing might have had, a totally secondary aspect. This is the third fact.

So the point is: these themes are like a "decoration" of the sex-game scenario, they are not a ritual murder scenario. They have nothing to do with it.



Quite the contrary, you are purposely doging it. The core is that there is no ritual murder scenario in Mignini's argument.
This is a matter of fact. There isn't even the word "ritual" or "rite". Nor "sect". There is only a description of a sexual context carried on under the effect of drugs (also mentions a possible motive to get Merediths' money) and speaks about strange personalities that write and read stories about sex-and-violence and collect knifes. So, strange folks that may have strange sexual ideas during drug fueled parties: this is the only scenario in the prosecution's argument.

The "source" I point out - I thought that was clear - is one journalist who reports a definition that includes the word "rito" (anyway in an ironic context etc.) that he did not hear, only claiming he is reporting something another journalist said. But - the most important point - there is NO corroboration of such word in trial documents. Hence, there is NO source. (because the only "source" is indirect and conflicts with the trial papers).

And finally, NO, I do not assign any blame to anyone. I am only sure that the prosecutor did not say this because I have read the transcript of prosecution speech and it is not in the document.
I have not red the speeches of Maresca or Pacelli so I simply cannot "clear" them with certainty (which is totally different from "blaming" them).
But whatever Pacelli or Maresca or others said, one thing is absolutely certain: that NO "ritual murder scenario" was ever put forward, and that all those who repeat there was a ritual motive, or sect-like motive, or a ritual murder scenario, are just disseminating a plain falsehood.

Also indicating that since not anymore then they must have first happened. And they did...why lie about this?

Do you also deny the story told by Mignini that relates to the night after Halloween because the desired night of Halloween was not convenient due to a dinner with all the roommates. The night of the dead...or do you suspect it was simply the news that only reported this and had nothing to do with Mignini?

How does Ms Carlizzi fit into this story?

 

[Bill Williams]

Also indicating that since not anymore then they must have first happened. And they did...why lie about this?

Do you also deny the story told by Mignini that relates to the night after Halloween because the desired night of Halloween was not convenient due to a dinner with all the roommates. The night of the dead...or do you suspect it was simply the news that only reported this and had nothing to do with Mignini?

How does Ms Carlizzi fit into this story?

Given the recent thaw in relations between us, I am loathe to comment that Machiavelli is implicitly calling Barbie Nadeau a liar. She's the one who wrote that Manuela Comodi threatened to quit the case if Mignini did not move from the "Satanic Rite" theory.

 

[RandyN]

Thanks Kaosium. I reread the sections you quoted from Massei several times and I still didn't get the logic.

The window I envision is a casement window that opens inward with external and internal shutters. The claim seems to be that it can be determined that the rock was thrown at the window from the inside because the position of the inner shutters would have prevented the glass from falling to the ground.

How do they know what the position of the interior shutters was when the rock was thrown?

I guess part of there claim is that some of the glass didn't fall to the ground because the shutters served to keep it in the frame. But in the pictures I have seen a fair amount of the window was busted out.

They claim that the rock was placed on the ground after it was thrown. Why was it necessary to place the rock on the ground, wouldn't it have just fallen down after striking the glass?

The claim didn't address the bag which is shown in one of the images that appears to have been knocked down by the trajectory of the thrown rock.

The claim also didn't mention the damage to the shutter which appears like it might have been caused by the thrown rock.

Maybe there are translation problems with what you quoted or maybe its just too late for me, but I just get what they were talking about.

The window evidence is conclusive. Outer shutters open, window and inner shutters closed but shutters not latched indicated by a lack of damage to them. Rock launched from outside off the nearby parapet...an easy and short toss...notice the cars in the lot while looking out Fiolmenas window...this is a piece of cake.

Why? The glass dispersal pattern only fits this, the rock evidence only fits this...the rock hit the hard floor and also knocked over and tore the black bag, plus it broke in a couple of pieces and left grains much like sand from the impact with the floor. Which is nothing like what setting this rock down would show if it happened that way.

They are suggesting that the outer shutters are closed. Now the inner shutter and window are opened slightly and the rock tossed at both in sort of the direction of the wardrobe. No evidence suggests this at all. Not the glass pattern, the rock final resting place, no glass towards the direction of the wardrobe. The rock resting place would have to be from being placed in this illogical position of facing the window, then to the right and under the chair. The logical placement if staged would be in the middle of the room ...not under the chair after ripping and knocking over a bag of clothes. Oh and they had to slam the rock down to cause it to break apart and leave the sand like particles in the process...just something beyond the average stagers I think...super stagers? uh huh.

 

[RandyN]

Given the recent thaw in relations between us, I am loathe to comment that Machiavelli is implicitly calling Barbie Nadeau a liar. She's the one who wrote that Manuela Comodi threatened to quit the case if Mignini did not move from the "Satanic Rite" theory.

Gosh hard to pick out a logical honest hero from your paragraph.

Pervert is reporting a newsflash though. Breaking is the story that the Italian Phone police (oh my) are coming into the case and are asking the assistance of the FBI to investigate all the "Mafia like activity" surrounding this case and the internets or whatever.

I wonder if pervert understands that may mean that he will be under investigation for disseminating false information to prevent a fair trial for the wrongly accused. He would be the first one Id look at. Its always the ballerina stalker...or was that the butler?

 

[Machiavelli]

Also indicating that since not anymore then they must have first happened. And they did...why lie about this?

Do you also deny the story told by Mignini that relates to the night after Halloween because the desired night of Halloween was not convenient due to a dinner with all the roommates. The night of the dead...or do you suspect it was simply the news that only reported this and had nothing to do with Mignini?

How does Ms Carlizzi fit into this story?

There is nothing to deny nor discuss about: the text is available, if you want me to post it from Mignini's argument.
Mignini does not describe any ritual scenario for the murder. He mentioned several themes and topics in the speech (including Hallloween, or cultural 'clues' related to manga comics) but not a ritualistic murder.

Mignini says that Knox and Solelcito wanted to party with Meredith on Halloween because that holiday would be the only chance when they would be home alone, Meredith's boyfriend being away. That's the practical occurrence that made Halloween and the "ponte" (the holiday including Thursday) a "unique" occasion. It seems Knox was most interested in the absence of Giacomo, as well as the fact that the house woud be empty.

Carlizzi has nothing to do with it.
She "has to do" with the story only as a person who spoke about it, insofar as she herself just made claims about the story (she claimed that it was ordered by a Satanic sect and she could tell secret reasons or something like that).

 

[acbytesla]

No; from no other country actually, only Italian ones.

It's not racism, wines are like schoolfriends, like fruits from your orchard; they have a taste like the minerals of the land, they are a taste of your home. You know who produced them, the people, the place, the climate that year.
And above all they are everyday things. You just don't do shopping far away.
Among the foreing wines I tasted, I liked some Spanish wines the best, those are the wines I like most after Italian ones; I fail to appreciate the French ones in general, don't like them so much; Californian ones are different, not exactly my "kind", also of a lower quality in average but above all their quality is very variable: the good ones exist but are few and expensive compared to equivalent Europenas. I liked some wines from Greece; and even from Lebanon and Syria when I travelled there and they were not bad.

I didn't think it was racism and I agree, the soil, the climate the grape as well as the skill of the vintner make all the difference in the world. As someone who loves to drink wine, I'm always looking for a good bottle.

I also like drinking from the small boutique wineries close to home. They are often not too expensive and often excellent, although they are all different in both cost and quality. My issue is there is so many choices and often it is like roulette, some great, some poor. It's easy to spend a lot of money and get a great bottle of wine, what I love is to find that inexpensive but excellent bottle of wine. I too am fond of many Spanish and Italian wines, also French, but I think I have consumed some good and not so good wines from everywhere.

What I wish is that we had more boutique specialty foods producers like they do in Italy and the rest of Europe. Like Parmesan Reggiano, Fontina and other great cheese makers in Europe. Also things like Black Forest Ham and Prosciutto. The cost of those great foods in the US are exorbitant. But things are moving in that direction in the states. It will just take another 20 years to have enough of them in the US at the moment.

 

[RandyN]

My understanding is that the vaginal swab was positive for Rudy's Y DNA, but not sperm. As I understand, Stefanoni supposed that the DNA came from Rudy's skin cells.

Could have just as easily been seminal fluid which did not happen to contain any semen although this seems unlikely. I thing Mr Rudy was fascinated with seeing his first Brazilian wax job and became curious enough to digitally investigate. This is still rape. His dream was interrupted by death throes perhaps.

Interesting that in Italy sexual violence will get you less time then the fake calunnia charge.

 

[Mary_H]

OK I dont know how sound the idea of the shoes and socks off already is. This is what I think based on logic since I have never seen the crime scene photos with the body present.

1. Who takes off shoes socks and jeans before removing the outer jacket worn on a cool Nov day? .... So, back to my point who undresses like this? Start from the bottom and work your way up? No...that did not happen.

That is exactly how I undress when the temperature is cool or cold. The very last thing to come off is my long sleeves; sometimes I will even step into the bathtub before I remove my shirt. Maybe it's because women have less muscle mass on top than men have.

 

[Mary_H]

I tell you, frankly, by now, I feel slightly uncomfortable at the thought of dining with someone expressing ideas like yours. Moreover, I'm not going to London soon. I will have to decline your offer but thank you. Maybe when things have changed and our views on the topics have developed a bit.

This is not a problem. I understand completely. Whereas a differing tone often accompanies a face to face meeting, it is also fraught with uncertainty.

I hope one day.

Give me enough time to save some dough, because I want to get in on that action. I bet anglolawyer and Ampulla of Vater would come, too. I'll have the tequila. Then I won't care what ideas get expressed.

 

[Draca]

Yes, as I said earlier, the aspirated blood droplets are the only solid indication we have as to when the stabbing occurred, and they appear to be only on her bra. I think she was stabbed in the process of Guede removing the bra, perhaps because she struggled at that point. I don't disagree that the assault may have continued for a very brief time afterwards.

And all over the wardrobe, as well as her finger streaks in blood on the wardrobe. Your scenario doesn't work. If he stabbed her while removing the bra, that would have to be by the wardrobe. There would have been way more blood on her breasts and torso if her top was undressed at that point.

 

[Bill Williams]

There is nothing to deny nor discuss about: the text is available, if you want me to post it from Mignini's argument.
Mignini does not describe any ritual scenario for the murder. He mentioned several themes and topics in the speech (including Hallloween, or cultural 'clues' related to manga comics) but not a ritualistic murder.

Mignini says that Knox and Solelcito wanted to party with Meredith on Halloween because that holiday would be the only chance when they would be home alone, Meredith's boyfriend being away. That's the practical occurrence that made Halloween and the "ponte" (the holiday including Thursday) a "unique" occasion. It seems Knox was most interested in the absence of Giacomo, as well as the fact that the house woud be empty.
Carlizzi has nothing to do with it.
She "has to do" with the story only as a person who spoke about it, insofar as she herself just made claims about the story (she claimed that it was ordered by a Satanic sect and she could tell secret reasons or something like that).

The thing about what Mignini says here is marked by one reality - there is NO evidence at all supporting the claim that this is the motive and/or a reconstruction - other than in Mignini's fantasy. Nothing, no testimony, not even a rumour really. Nada. Niente.

You once said you would provide a timeline for this crime, Machiavelli, a timeline that would account for the evidence. You refused so to do Out of the many reasons you offered in declining, one you said that this was a war. And that you did not want to give aid and comfort to your enemy.

I believe something different. I believe you simply cannot provide a timeline, as neither can Mr. Mignini. All he can do is offer, in seratum, various fantasies. What you describe above is the mid-point in his fantasy bewtten when Comodi (acc. to no less than Barbie Nadeau) threatened to resign the case if Mignini went to trial with the Satanic ritual killing motive.

By the end of the Massei trial, Mignini had dropped motive all together, and went into the Hellmann trial with Massei's view - that the killing had happened for no motive at all.

You can put an end to all this, Machiavelli, by providing a timeline. This is much like Massei himself tried to do. And if you remember our other conversations, Massei could only do it by dropping from 11 to 13 things the prosecution claimed - like psychopathology for the accused, like mixed blood, etc.

You can disagree with me, Mach, but you cannot disagree with the facts.

But you, oh so try.

 

[Kaosium]

Thanks RWVBWL. I have remained skeptical of the accidental contamination theory. Presumably there would have been DNA from many individuals throughout Kercher's bedroom and the apartment. How is it that Sollecito came to be the second largest contributor to DNA on the clasp after the clasp was contaminated from a mixture of DNA lying around for which he must have been a tiny contributor. Several different scenarios were suggested above that might be possible explanations, but my uninformed gut feel was that they were unlikely to be an explanation for the alleged existence of Sollecito's DNA on the hook.

It's not that unlikely, Raffaele was at the discovery, thus was amongst the last people to be at that doorway who wasn't all dolled up in forensic gear. Not only that, he exerted himself, he wasn't just standing around.

Here's how those Italian court-appointed independent experts described the conditions of the scene for the collection of the bra clasp:

- The item was recovered 46 days after the crime, in a context highly suggestive of environmental contamination. The risk of incorrectly interpreting such environmental contaminatns from dust could have been minimized only by taking the care [avendo l'accortezza] to institute extremely stringent control procedures, including the analysis of extracts from sterile cotton swabs soaked with sterile buffer passed on ambient surfaces to take samples of dust, a procedure which was not carried out;

FBI veteran Steve Moore put it =this way:

(ROME) - Retired FBI agent Steve Moore has spent hours watching the Amanda Knox crime scene video. His experience and expertise lead him to say this:

"They were doing unsound forensic techniques that lead to cross contamination. Their techniques were ... horrible," he said. "If you showed that video tape in an American court you would have lost most of your evidence."

FBI veteran John Douglas put it thusly in an interview for an article that commissioned but couldn't be published in Italy (you don't criticize the police or prosecution in Italy with Mignini around) but was made available by the interviewer for a free site:

KE: In your professional opinion, what went wrong?

JD: Let me first say, for the police in Perugia, may only have the opportunity to see a case like this in a career. Unfortunately here, we see homicides like this all the time.

The first investigators didn’t know what they were handling. The collections and preservation of evidence was done incorrectly and led to contamination. Luckily we have the video; not only photos. You can see all the mistakes that were done. If I was brought in on this investigation, I would have told them they were on the wrong track.

KE: The media have been very interested and involved in this case from the beginning: do you think their role helped or damaged the investigator’s job and the judge’s assessments?

JD: It absolutely damaged both. The media can shape people’s opinion. A single photograph seen out of context, can affect us. The investigators can also be responsible for leaking information to manipulate the media and thus, public opinion.

KE: Do you believe the investigators made mistakes that subsequently diverted the course of the investigation?

JD: Well, that’s the entire story, isn’t it? First, there were too many people in those rooms. They should have removed Amanda, Raffaele and anyone who was not part of the investigation team, and roped it off.

From the video taken from the crime scene, there were numerous mistakes. The investigators can be seen passing evidence, dropping it on the ground, using the same tweezers, not changing gloves, no protective caps to cover hair. Any insider can recognize these errors. What the investigators have done may seem right on the "outside", they had their protective clothing, boots, but cross- contamination of the evidence was more than evident.

KE: What is cross-contamination, exactly?

JD: It means simply that evidence from anyone, anyone who came and went in those rooms have the potential to leave their DNA, prints, etc. and run the risk of being transferred microscopically.

KE: Allegedly, DNA of Sollecito’s was said to have been found on Meredith’s bra clasp. DNA of Amanda Knox’s is said to be on the murder weapon; on the knife’s handle and Meredith’s on the blade.

JD: It’s not the murder weapon. As far as I’m concerned, it hasn’t been found; probably never will. It doesn’t fit with the imprint made on the bed sheet, or the wounds found on Meredith. The evidence collection video from December 18th shows a knife, randomly chosen, from Sollecito’s apartment and transported to the lab.

The video taken on November 2nd shows the bra clasp, very clearly on the floor of the crime scene. On December 18th, after returning to the scene more than 16 times, the video shows the bra clasp, still there. It had already been kicked and shuffled around on the floor for six weeks! Secondly, the amount of DNA, supposedly, that was Sollecito’s, is highly suspect.

Moreover, if that’s all the evidence you’ve got, two tiny pieces of DNA, of the plethora that should have been there… well, it’s simply ludicrous.

I just linked the first ones that came up, further information from both of these experts can be found at their websites.

As for Raffaele's contribution being the second largest, just why is that of any import? What information have you read that leads you to believe that matters? Here's what it looks like on the electropherogram. In each loci (location--that's the bands across the top of each row D798511 is the first one for example) the dominant ones are Meredith's, all the little ones are everyone else. Note at the top right one CSF1PO Meredith has duplicate alleles (12) thus only one shows up.

As for why Raffaele's 'comes up' that is because he was on trial and Stefanoni refused (to this day!) to reveal the EDFs which would allow anyone to go looking for the same sort of LT/LCN profiles that could be found for anyone else. You see these other little bumps at the bottom of these electropherograms? That's just me picking the first four listed, I don't even know what they're for off the top of my head. Each of those little bumps might indicate additional people on those electropherograms as well, but you'd need the EDFs to determine that for sure, she has defied court orders in order to keep them hidden. As Halides1 has linked extensively, that information is required to analyze the DNA work and is handed over as a matter of course in the US, however in Italy it can be hidden--just like negative blood test results--and there's no consequences. So they do, so they can make arguments about just what they want to show regarding the DNA evidence, just like they wanted to use the luminol results without revealing it had tested negative with TMB and was never subjected to a confirmatory test.

In Italy the prosecutor's decision is the main determinant of evidence standards, anything the judge objects to is (likely) grounds for appeal, so by and large they don't bother as it will end up in court at some time regardless. Incidentally, it was irrelevant as to whether Amanda and Raffaele were acquitted in the first trial, they'd have had to face another one regardless. For crissakes Mignini even appealed that conviction (he wanted life they were only given 25 and 26 years) so there's a tendency to just let the prosecutor produce the evidence, the defense makes it's arguments and it's 'fair' as long as there's no bias by anyone that what the prosecution produces has any inherent validity. Pure garbage (like everything from the second trip) can be produced in Italian Courts without censure or sanction. Here's an article as to the culture of the Italian Court System, the whole piece is worth reading but especially this part:

The truth is, Italians have long since recognized the unreliability and compromised nature of their courts. At the moment, the Italian public's trust in the justice system is at an all-time low. According to a November poll by Euromedia research group, only 16 percent of Italians fully trust it; just two years ago, the figure was 28 percent. And Italian civil rights groups are intense in their criticism of what they view as kangaroo courts.

For one, they say that coerced confessions and the use of dubious forensic evidence, as might have happened in the Knox case, are way too common. "Inquiries are conducted without any reliable methods," says Roberto Malini, president of EveryOne, a nongovernmental organization that defends ethnic minorities in jail. "Tests take place solely in the laboratories of the state police. There's no independent lab, and independent observers do not have access to the police's work."

He also claims that prosecutors routinely present evidence as proof. "Recently we've followed the case of Romulus Mailat, a young man accused of raping and murdering a woman in Rome," Malini says. "The prosecutors [said] the defendant had blood under his fingernails, assuming it was the victim's. Oddly enough, they didn't think of taking a DNA test. The defendant's lawyer had to ask for it. When finally the test was taken, the prosecutors claimed it was unreliable because the blood had been reportedly altered by water, and they refused to show the results." Mailat was convicted.

Legal experts also share concerns about Italy's bar for admissibility. Il Giornale, a conservative newspaper, for instance, recently published an interview with Marco Morin, a Venice-based firearms expert who declared he no longer wanted to work in Italian courts. "In the United States, federal judges must study a 637-page manual in order to be able to evaluate [forensic] evidence," he told the newspaper. "Here, they accept everything without questioning, as long as it comes from the institutional laboratory."

I tried to confirm that the C & V report supported what Vechiotti was reported to have said above.

That's where she was (very probably) saying that going by the accepted scientific standards of the day, a profile couldn't be pieced together for Raffaele. Like I've noted before, for most of her work on this case Stefanoni maintained an RFU threshold of 100, 50 is the lowest that was in use anywhere at the time. You can go lower than that and still profile a DNA sample, but you're violating one of the contamination safeguards and thus ought to take special care that the item was handled properly in a lab equipped to do so or all you may be doing is profiling contamination...

I read through the section about the bra clasp in the on-line English version of the C & V report here:http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/

Unfortunately the diagrams were very difficult if not impossible to read. But it sounds like they didn't find any DNA on either the clasp or the knife for testing.

Heh, aren't those diagrams cute! That's all Stefanoni ever wanted people to see, the ones I linked for you are from the what was finally released to the defense, as noted above some crucial records were never revealed.

They couldn't find anything on the bra clasp, it had deteriorated due to rust after being stored in liquid. The knife generated a sample that was too low for the standards of that lab so it wasn't processed, which is the scientifically correct approach. That sample will now be tested it appears as the prosecution objected.

According to the report they did analyze the genetic testing done by Stefazoni. It sounds like this might be the relevant section of the report:
Sample B seems to be the clasp. I wasn't sure what sample C was.

Samples 36B and 36C are both from the knife blade, 'B' is where the DNA of Meredith was purportedly found, 'C' is another sample that gave the same negative results for DNA with the Qubit quantifier but was not analyzed the same way. It makes one wonder how she 'knew' that 'B' was 'special.' My guess is she knew that was the one that went through the Speed-Vac which may well have been contaminated with Meredith's DNA: according to what Diocletus (who has done an extensive inquiry into this) has posted all the data from other samples that used the Speed Vac were withheld.

It sounds to to me that the C & V report is saying that the DNA concentration was too low to do reliable testing with based on information from the Stefazoni report and some information that the C & V report authors inferred. I remain a bit confused though because I thought I understood Kaosium above to say that there was sufficient DNA to obtain reliable results from and the results were probably accurate although he believed accidental or intentional contamination was the probable explanation of why Sollecito DNA was found on the clasp.

I also think the Knife blade electropherogram was generated off of Meredith's DNA, probably around 10 pgs. It's easy to find contamination if you go looking for it, you can profile it and everything and produce it in court and dare the defense to prove you wrong. Neither of these items would have been permitted in an American or British court for damn good reasons. People think of contamination as a rare event when if you don't even bother to give any more than lip service to the regular standards you're going to be able to find it everywhere employing LT DNA analysis.

 

[Antony]

It certainly is authoritarian. I wouldn't say it is right-wing. In the US, "authoritarian" is nearly synonymous with "right-wing," because the hard left simply has no power base in the US. That is not necessarily true in Italy. Machiavelli (and the judiciary) are opposed to the rightist elements of the Italian gov't. Machiavelli has opinions about US foreign policy in common with left-wingers, and the "honorary president" of the Italian Supreme Court is a truther, which is the province of the far left.

I'm not trying to win friends or influence people at this late date. I'm trying to understand where Machiavelli is coming from. Italy has experienced a dictatorship within living memory. It is not politically stable in the way the US is. Machiavelli has at various times explained his reasons for supporting the judiciary, and they sort of make sense in general terms, given the truly dangerous political undercurrents of Italian society. But his need to defend the magistrates on every particular, no matter what the facts, is the sign of a political fanatic. That is honestly what I think he is, based on his comments and his sources of information. I don't think he is a paid shill for Mignini or anything of the sort.

I would prefer to continue this by PM as it is becoming off-topic, and because although I respect you for the work you have done in this case I profoundly disagree with your use of the terms "left-wing" and "right-wing". I think other supporters of AK and RS here feel the same way.

Living as I do in the UK, it is difficult for me to post other than between around 5pm and midnight our time - (10am - 5pm Seattle time).

 

[Kaosium]

No respect necessary, I don't hold myself out as an expert and my level of knowledge about this subject is probably on the low side for anybody participating in this thread. But please feel free to respect me if you must.

I am getting confounding information here. On one hand I think I have understood that there was plenty of DNA for a reliable test and on the other hand the C & V report suggests otherwise. Your theory seems to fall some place in the middle. There was enough DNA for a reliable test, but the amount was so small that a few bits of RS DNA could have been lying around and happened to attach to the clasp. Maybe but my gut feel is that there was thousands of times more DNA from non RS people than from RS and the likelihood is very very small that a random bit of RS DNA happened to attach to the clasp while the contribution from everybody else except Kercher was tiny or undetectable.

If my reading of the C & V report was correct (and I'm not sure that this is the case) it sounds like the most likely explanation for the alleged RS DNA on the clasp result was that the test was not reliable. The people that did the testing for the C & V report could not identify any cells on the clasp and found so little DNA that they didn't do the DNA testing on the clasp at all. Things are not quite lining up here to make a completely consistent story and I'm not sure where the problem lies although my lack of understanding of the relevant facts might very well be the cause.

It's different applications of the word 'reliable.' Forensic DNA Scientists (and technicians) have standards to ensure their results are valid and not the result of contamination or mis-identification. Both are a danger especially with low template DNA.

You can profile just about anything these days and run it through a computer and figure out the odds a certain person contributed to the sample, but that's not the most important factor, especially with LT DNA.

Take a look at this video, Dr. Elizabeth Johnson is in the background and also talks about another possibility, innocent transfer, but look at the videos of the scene and how it changed between the original discovery and when the police in Perugia came back. The Polizia Scientifica were done with their work, outside Stefanoni who'd gotten a special dispensation to join Mignini's team. It wasn't the Polizia Scientifica who collected the knife either, it was the Polizia di Stato in Perugia, the ones who were responsible for the arrests of Patrick, Amanda and Raffaele and were basking in the light of the press of three nations. Then they realized they didn't have any real evidence against the three they'd arrested but had all sorts against a fourth man they tracked down in Germany. Patrick had never been to the cottage, they couldn't find anything of him and had about 20 people to alibi him, but Amanda lived there, Raffaele was at the discovery and was Amanda's cuddle muffin and left his DNA all over her too which can also transfer--and they were each other's alibi.

With the scene brutally compromised already they went looking for anything they could find that would help their case, and at that scene it was probable they'd find something if they looked hard enough and tested enough stuff. Or maybe one of them, perhaps the one most responsible for their arrests, 'helped' it along a little. I do know they have plausible deniability, just as C&V detailed that site was highly prone to contamination, who could ever convict them when there's such a likely cause of the anomalous result?

Or it could just have been the obvious answer: they went looking for contamination and found some, secure in the knowledge that everyone assumes contamination is rare (no matter what they do!) and will naturally assume the result is both damning and reliable simply because the bumps are all in the right spot. Christ in Italy she could just photoshop it, they don't even have to turn over the data that produced the electropherogram. Not that I think that happened, but perhaps that gives you an idea of how little oversight there is.

 

[Kaosium]

Unfortunately the diagrams were very difficult if not impossible to read. But it sounds like they didn't find any DNA on either the clasp or the knife for testing.

Just to clarify as it occurred to me there might be a misunderstanding here. When C&V were commissioned by the court to evaluate the DNA evidence they both analyzed Stefanoni's results through her report, the RTIGF, and also attempted to retest both the clasp and the knife. The clasp had deteriorated due to rust under Stefanoni's tender auspices (perhaps because it was stored in liquid) and was untestable. The Knife produced a sample too small for testing with that equipment. That sample, 36I, will be tested by the Caribinieri (kind of a military police in Italy) due to the prosecution's appeal.

The original bra clasp sample is 165 B.

Amanda's DNA on the handle of the knife from Raffaele's drawer is 36A

Meredith's DNA on the blade is 36B.

There's also samples 36C-H which were all negative.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

Give me enough time to save some dough, because I want to get in on that action. I bet anglolawyer and Ampulla of Vater would come, too. I'll have the tequila. Then I won't care what ideas get expressed.

Oh come now Mary, those Marriott checks should allow for an extensive European holiday. I won't let you have the tequila; there's nothing like the wine in Italy! My cousins make wine (in addition to tomato sauce, pasta, olive oil, and many other things) and there is nothing like the homemade version of these foods. We are from a more southern area than Machiavelli, so he may find "our" wares less appealing, but I honestly have never tasted such fabulous food and drink in my entire life than when I am over there. You can drink the Grappa -- that stuff will grow hair on your chest!

I'm sure we could find something to talk about, something we all could see eye-to-eye about. We might have to leave this case off limits for discussion though. We are all too certain our respective positions are correct.

 

[acbytesla]

I also think the Knife blade electropherogram was generated off of Meredith's DNA, probably around 10 pgs. It's easy to find contamination if you go looking for it, you can profile it and everything and produce it in court and dare the defense to prove you wrong. Neither of these items would have been permitted in an American or British court for damn good reasons. People think of contamination as a rare event when if you don't even bother to give any more than lip service to the regular standards you're going to be able to find it everywhere employing LT DNA analysis.

Excellent analysis. Kaosium

 

[Kaosium]

What made me "change my mind" was that I made a search and found no corroboration. I had this Italian newspaper that reported the words "rito sessuale casalingo". But then I read the transcripts and I've found no "rite" (except the word in Micheli's report). In fact I realized that the only source that was reporting about a "rito sessuale casalingo" was a jouralist from La Repubblica, who maintains his report is indirect, since he is only reporting this second-hand from another press source.

So, I point out the existence of this source but I can't say such scenario or word was ever part of the trial. Now, because I have no "rito" in the prosecution's arguments, and also given that juge Micheli himself points out that Mignini "dropped" all these themes in his replies after his closing arguments, the possibilities left are that the word "rito" originates from Maresca or Pacelli, or that it was just a mistake from the press source.

What about all the reports we linked regarding the ritualistic nature, including the Sunday Times article from John Kercher himself? It didn't have to be part of the court arguments for him to have proposed it. My understanding was he dropped it, but that doesn't mean he never entertained it, which would explain all the people who reported that he did.