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

[Diastole]

But experts who have looked at the e-gram for 36B think it is most likely the result of lab contamination involving amplified PCR product from another test. The e-gram shows a complete profile, but at a very low level, rather than a partial profile with some markers missing or attenuated, which would be more typical of a sample with a very low starting template.

This is a very interesting insight, particularly in conjunction with Stefanoni's testimony in which she revealed that she did not obtain a precise quantification (or, in fact, any real quantification) of the 36B sample prior to amplification.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

After completing Amanda Knox's audiobook I picked up Sollecito's audiobook and am working my way through it...

I know this isn't contributing much (my knowledge level of the finer points of evidence isn't high enough to do so anyway) but I just have to say again, that it is absolutely mind-blowing what was done to these two young, innocent peoples' lives. As he says early on, 4 of what should have been the best years of their lives were completely taken away and ruined.

And it would be one thing if that was done because Guede or someone else had done some amazing job of framing them, at that point you could sort of say well... heck, what was the system supposed to do? An expert framing job was done... they made a good faith effort with the evidence they had.

But this was a case invented out of whole cloth and based, seemingly, on nothing more than being desperate to solve it, and having strong imaginations and an immediate latching onto these two because their behavior seemed slightly out of the norm.

The problem is, once you've decided that someone is the devil, or behaving strangely, and you put them under that microscope, you start to see everything through that lens and it's a self-confirming bias. This is such a runaway example of that.

Which would be one thing if the police had the ability to follow the real evidence and drop that line of inquiry when they should have, but good lord they were intent on riding that bus right off the side of the cliff weren't they?

At the very least, these people deserve to be seen as innocent now, and shown great sympathy. Clearly, from some quarters they are, but I find it so disgusting that there are still so many people with this irrational hatred and certainty in lies. As I've been taking more of an interest in this, I'm still seeing quite recent commentary from posters around the net and even talking heads on videos, where they still act like "well we don't know, we'll never know the truth... but they were at least involved somehow it seems like!" ugh.

We do know the truth!

 

[acbytesla]

Ah, I think I see now. They saw that 'author' listed as Raffaele and jumped to the conclusion he must have written the letter?

Oh. Dear.

Exactly.

Actually, now that I look at this closely, this is more absurd than I originally thought. The original letter was sent to the court on 20/09/2011, and that letter refers to the anonymous letter sent to Raffaele.

I really don't get the Guilters and their grasping at straws.

 

[JREF2010]

Chris you full well know that C&V didn't say that the material on the knife that produced the DNA of Meredith was really starch.
ETA - since we know that the sample was destroyed by testing how could C&V possibly have determined that what Stefanoni tested was starch?

I don't think it was C&V, but wasn't it Torre who suggested the final test to determine it was starch? Frank Sfarzo wrote that in one of his latter articles before the Gestapo silenced his web page...if I recall.

Its out there but I know that was the place I heard the sample was deemed starch.

add..is this what your talking about?
- The cytomorphological tests on the items did not reveal the presence of cellular material. Some samples of item 36 (knife), in particular sample “H”, present granules with a circular/hexagonal characteristic morphology with a cental radial structure. A more detailed microscopic study, together with the consultation of data in the literature, allowed us to ascertain that the structures in question are attributable to granules of starch, thus matter of a vegetable nature.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Frankly I think another proof of their innocence is their forceful media campaign, these books, etc.

I think guilty people who get away with it tend to lay fairly low. Casey Anthony, OJ Simpson... Simpson did eventually sort of write a book, and it was one in which he basically confessed.

Knox and Sollecito reek of innocence, to me.

There is no hint of knowledge of guilt from them or their families like I've seen in other cases.

As Kaosium pointed out earlier also, I don't believe they'd put their families through this AND the kind of crime by people who barely knew eachother which was suggested just doesn't happen...

 

[JREF2010]

After completing Amanda Knox's audiobook I picked up Sollecito's audiobook and am working my way through it...

I know this isn't contributing much (my knowledge level of the finer points of evidence isn't high enough to do so anyway) but I just have to say again, that it is absolutely mind-blowing what was done to these two young, innocent peoples' lives. As he says early on, 4 of what should have been the best years of their lives were completely taken away and ruined.

And it would be one thing if that was done because Guede or someone else had done some amazing job of framing them, at that point you could sort of say well... heck, what was the system supposed to do? An expert framing job was done... they made a good faith effort with the evidence they had.

But this was a case invented out of whole cloth and based, seemingly, on nothing more than being desperate to solve it, and having strong imaginations and an immediate latching onto these two because their behavior seemed slightly out of the norm.

The problem is, once you've decided that someone is the devil, or behaving strangely, and you put them under that microscope, you start to see everything through that lens and it's a self-confirming bias. This is such a runaway example of that.

Which would be one thing if the police had the ability to follow the real evidence and drop that line of inquiry when they should have, but good lord they were intent on riding that bus right off the side of the cliff weren't they?

At the very least, these people deserve to be seen as innocent now, and shown great sympathy. Clearly, from some quarters they are, but I find it so disgusting that there are still so many people with this irrational hatred and certainty in lies. As I've been taking more of an interest in this, I'm still seeing quite recent commentary from posters around the net and even talking heads on videos, where they still act like "well we don't know, we'll never know the truth... but they were at least involved somehow it seems like!" ugh.

We do know the truth!

Ive been following it and it still is a black hole, due to prosecution who don't study the only semen stain in the murder scene, in a murder rape case and non recorded interrogations because of budget cuts per Migninni.

the list is too long...

will justice be done to the prosecution who are now known to be liars, a lab police unit that lies on the stand? I doubt it.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Ive been following it and it still is a black hole, due to prosecution who don't study the only semen stain in the murder scene, in a murder rape case and non recorded interrogations because of budget cuts per Migninni.

the list is too long...

will justice be done to the prosecution who are now known to be liars, a lab police unit that lies on the stand? I doubt it.

Yea it's pretty amazing that they don't want to test that stain.

The only reason I can think of, is that it would make letting Guede skate with 16 years seem even more absurd than it already does.

There's no way they didn't deliberately fail to record those interrogations in order to allow for law-breaking methods.

My question is, did they deliberately destroy exculpatory evidence on the hard drives?

 

[Mary_H]

Frankly I think another proof of their innocence is their forceful media campaign, these books, etc.

I think guilty people who get away with it tend to lay fairly low. Casey Anthony, OJ Simpson... Simpson did eventually sort of write a book, and it was one in which he basically confessed.

Knox and Sollecito reek of innocence, to me.

There is no hint of knowledge of guilt from them or their families like I've seen in other cases.<snip>

That's a great point, Skeptic Tank. It takes a very hard person (hence the term "hardened criminal") to keep a secret like the one these kids would have to have been keeping for six years. They just are not hard people, at all, no matter how much the PGP try to project that onto them.

 

[Mary_H]

<snip>My question is, did they deliberately destroy exculpatory evidence on the hard drives?

In my opinion, that was the result of incompetence. They are very good at finding the tiny bits and pieces that could point to guilt, and they could probably have found a lot on the computers if they had wanted to. They didn't have the know-how.

 

[Supernaut]

Bill you jeer Vogt and cheer Candace.....blah, blah

Yes, for obvious reasons.

Vogt is a stupid, small-minded, shallow, talentless, self-interested, jealous, vindictive, malicious, careerist, money-grubbing harpy, and Candace is a thoroughly decent human being.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Yes, for obvious reasons.

Vogt is a stupid, small-minded, shallow, talentless, self-interested, jealous, vindictive, malicious, careerist, money-grubbing harpy, and Candace is a thoroughly decent human being.

Would you be willing to give me a summary of who these two women are?

 

[Supernaut]

Phew - good thing Vogt isn't a JREF member.

 

[Supernaut]

Would you be willing to give me a summary of who these two women are?

No.

If you can't be bothered to use your own time and effort to find out, tough - I'm certainly not going to give you mine.

 

[Mary_H]

Would you be willing to give me a summary of who these two women are?

Andrea's blog: http://thefreelancedesk.com/

Candace's: http://www.candacedempsey.com/

 

[Kaosium]

Would you be willing to give me a summary of who these two women are?

Andrea Vogt was the reporter for a Seattle newspaper covering the murder and the trial. She fell in with PMF early, but tried to give a balanced approach to her articles. The former inhibited the latter in my opinion.

Candace Dempsey is a journalism school grad who'd just started a blog and started following the case. Very early she realized there was something terribly wrong with the 'investigation' and chose to buck the trend in the media at the time which had judged them guilty and was looking for juicy details the police and prosecution were more than happy to provide, regardless if there was any truth to them. She wrote a book called "Murder in Italy" which was an early look at the investigation and the first trial, and by far the most accurate and balanced look at the time. In retrospect she may have been too deferential to the police and prosecution, which was just an attempt at fairness herself and she could hardly know how it would all turn out with the appeals court.

 

[Grinder]

add..is this what your talking about?
- The cytomorphological tests on the items did not reveal the presence of cellular material. Some samples of item 36 (knife), in particular sample “H”, present granules with a circular/hexagonal characteristic morphology with a cental radial structure. A more detailed microscopic study, together with the consultation of data in the literature, allowed us to ascertain that the structures in question are attributable to granules of starch, thus matter of a vegetable nature.

The material was all used up by Stefanoni. No one determined that the sample used to get Meredith's DNA was starch. Chris knows this but doesn't wish to correct the canard put forward by Candace.

C&V argue that the DNA was flawed because of several factors none of which is that it was actually starch.

Katody: the second climb wasn't a climb at all but a demonstration that the shutters could easily be opened.

I really don't see why saying the climb would be harder than it appeared in the experienced rock climber video in any way disturbs people. I personally think the shutters were open and the rock was thrown from outside, most likely by Rudy.

Picture of the balcony outside lawyers' office. Way different.

 

[Katody Matrass]

Katody: the second climb wasn't a climb at all but a demonstration that the shutters could easily be opened.

Well, no. I recommend watching it again.

I really don't see why saying the climb would be harder than it appeared in the experienced rock climber video in any way disturbs people. I personally think the shutters were open and the rock was thrown from outside, most likely by Rudy.

It doesn't disturb me. You said Guede entered through the door. Now this one makes little sense. Could you explain it better?

 

[Grinder]

Andrea Vogt was the reporter for a Seattle newspaper covering the murder and the trial. She fell in with PMF early, but tried to give a balanced approach to her articles. The former inhibited the latter in my opinion.

Vogt is a journalism graduate that had written at least one book and was writing freelance from Germany and Italy. She was in court for most of the hearings.

Candace Dempsey is a journalism school grad who'd just started a blog and started following the case. Very early she realized there was something terribly wrong with the 'investigation' and chose to buck the trend in the media at the time which had judged them guilty and was looking for juicy details the police and prosecution were more than happy to provide, regardless if there was any truth to them. She wrote a book called "Murder in Italy" which was an early look at the investigation and the first trial, and by far the most accurate and balanced look at the time. In retrospect she may have been too deferential to the police and prosecution, which was just an attempt at fairness herself and she could hardly know how it would all turn out with the appeals court.

Candace had just begun writing a "readers" blog. She picked upon the story and became a spokesperson for the pro Amanda position very early on. She has never disclosed when she actually was in Perugia but it seemed she stayed in Seattle but had "sources" the PGP always thought started with Chris Mellas, Amanda's step-father. She also seems to formed a relationship with Preston and Frank Sfarzo. Both of those people were part of FOA (friends of Amanda)

By February of 2008 she was pitching a book and never missed an opportunity to promote it. She campaigned relentlessly to get the PIP fans to vote her book some obscure award. She wrote the book in the true crime genre which precludes the need for footnotes.

Candace's blog was filled with inaccuracies including the most recent mention of the DNA being starch. I've pointed these out in the past and the response is that it is just a blog so it need not be accurate, just opinions.

She long ago gave up any appearance of any sort of objectivity.

You can look at her speech at a FOA forum at Seattle University before the first appeal and judge a bit for yourself.

 

[Grinder]

Well, no. I recommend watching it again.

No you watch it again.

You are completely wrong. He never goes down to the ground again. He lowers himself so his feet are on the grate and demos that it would be easy to open the shutters.

In the only climb from the ground he puts his feet on the bottom window sill and then springs up grabbing first the upper sill and then the new grate that now covers the window. It would have much more difficult had the upper grate not been there even if the shutters were open.

Here's the video the climb starts at about 18 min.

It doesn't disturb me. You said Guede entered through the door. Now this one makes little sense. Could you explain it better?

It makes total sense. He threw the rock and waited to see if anybody heard. Meredith came home and he either talked her into letting him in or forced his way.

 

[acbytesla]

Vogt is a journalism graduate that had written at least one book and was writing freelance from Germany and Italy. She was in court for most of the hearings.

Candace had just begun writing a "readers" blog. She picked upon the story and became a spokesperson for the pro Amanda position very early on. She has never disclosed when she actually was in Perugia but it seemed she stayed in Seattle but had "sources" the PGP always thought started with Chris Mellas, Amanda's step-father. She also seems to formed a relationship with Preston and Frank Sfarzo. Both of those people were part of FOA (friends of Amanda)

By February of 2008 she was pitching a book and never missed an opportunity to promote it. She campaigned relentlessly to get the PIP fans to vote her book some obscure award. She wrote the book in the true crime genre which precludes the need for footnotes.

Candace's blog was filled with inaccuracies including the most recent mention of the DNA being starch. I've pointed these out in the past and the response is that it is just a blog so it need not be accurate, just opinions.

She long ago gave up any appearance of any sort of objectivity.

You can look at her speech at a FOA forum at Seattle University before the first appeal and judge a bit for yourself.

I just don't understand you Grinder. There was a time when I thought the two innocents were probably guilty. I think I kept an open mind regarding this for quite some time. My mind is not open any more. The evidence persuaded to come to a conclusion. I am convinced that Candace came to the same conclusion. This DOESN'T mean that Candace became "dishonest" in her reporting. Can't one provide accurate reporting without giving up their right to logically analyze and come to their own conclusion?