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

[Strozzi]

Once again. What redeeming qualities do you find so admirable so as to offer Stefanoni any benefit of doubt at all? Is it her ability to go into the detention hearing and lie about the quantification of sample 36B? Or maybe her repeated withholding of the EDF'S? Or her co-conspiracy effort along with Comodi at attempting (twice) to introduce false control data sheets into the court record during the appeal trial? Or her little lapse of memory when she forgot about the TMB thingy? Shall I continue?

Look Napolini has been caught with her pants down so to speak...but so has Stefanoni. The fact that she twists and turns and passes back and forth and up and down from the floor this one tiny bra clasp meanwhile a whole bloody outer blue jacket goes without its own collection production number tells me all I need to know about this little Italian opera...It sucks!

She is lying scum who deserves no benefit of any doubt. She is someone willing to lie about scientific data when the very concept of scientific data is suppose to work against liars... (which is why she keeps files and data hidden...ding ding)

At some point a reader has to realize that police, forensic police, and prosecutor are trying to fix the case. They believe the defendants are guilty and it is acceptable to help the evidence along in order to get the conviction. Given the crudeness of evidence collection and analysis (too low, too low), I must conclude that the authorities don't often have to rely on verifiable evidence that passes the creditibility test. They normally extract confessions, one way or the other.

Picking up one knife from Raffaele's cutlery drawer while he looks on, and ignoring other knives, screwdrivers, etc. from Meredith's own kitchen 20' from where her body lay, tells me 1) they needed a knife, 2) were not really analyzing knives to see if one might be the right knife, and 3) showing Raffaele that we are the police and we will and can do anything to you to make you confess or make you fit the crime, and we can get away with it. So confess yourself, or tell us "the cow"* did it.

* For those readers who don't understand "the cow" reference, that is the term in Italian that the police used in referring to Amanda Knox while interrogating Raffaele in the police station interrogation room. (Reader, ask yourself if the interrogators sounded fair, balanced, objective.)

 

[MDDVS]

This discussion about pornography is ridiculous. Italy has a very prolific pornographic industry and many italian directors produce films with a sadistic bent.

I mean, there was even a famous italian pornographic actress who was a member of the italian parliament. How much mainstream can you get?

And this is ignoring the popular "giallo" movie genre, where violence is eroticized and the killer is usually a woman. Coincidence? You decide.

And this Machiavelly guy is trying to paint Rafaelle as a sinister person for watching porn? Don't make me laugh. Italy is drenched in porn. He himself admited has much earlier in this thread.

 

[Bill Williams]

At some point a reader has to realize that police, forensic police, and prosecutor are trying to fix the case. They believe the defendants are guilty and that it is acceptable to help the evidence along in order to get the conviction. Given the crudeness of evidence collection and analysis (too low, too low), I must conclude that the authorities don't often have to rely on verifiable evidence that passes the creditibility test. They normally extract confessions, one way or the other.

Picking up one knife from Raffaele's cutlery drawer while he looks on, and ignoring other knives, screwdrivers, etc. from Meredith's own kitchen 20' from where her body lay, tells me 1) they needed a knife, 2) were not really analyzing knives to see if one might be the right knife, and 3) showing Raffaele that we are the police and we will and can do anything to you to make you confess or make you fit the crime, and we can get away with it. So confess yourself, or tell us "the cow"* did it.

* For those readers who don't understand "the cow" reference, that is the term in Italian that the police used in referring to Amanda Knox while interrogating Raffaele in the police station interrogation room. (Reader, ask yourself if the interrogators sounded fair, balanced, objective.)

The project of interrogation is not to be fair, balanced or objective to begin with.

Interrogations are about one thing and one thing only.

Confession. Interrogations are not about solving the case or gathering the evidence, interrogations are about getting the likely perp in the room and accusing them, bullying them, Reid Techniquing them... all for the purpose of confession. They will get you to think of how it might have been done and cut off at the pass ANY talk that you might be innocent. They are not interested in that - and the "they" in that is ANY interrogator.

Remember that 19 times out f 20 they have the perp in the room.

Interrogations are not about solving the crime, they are about getting the person in the room to admit they are involved in the crime. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Dan O.]

2. The cops had exclusive "custody" of the cottage, and could have entered any time they wanted (as they did November 6-7).

Don't forget November 13/14 when the cottage front Door was discovered open.

I also wonder whether that clasp ever left the premises prior to December.

There was one comment that the clasp wasn't given it's own number because the bra had already been given a number. This is a curious comment because it indicates that the clasp was collected on November 3rd but not cataloged. Stefanoni would have discovered this fact and could easily have brought the clasp back to the cottage to be found again. I should probably try to find who made that comment.

 

[Strozzi]

You have Amanda walking barefoot into a room with obvious broken glass.

If you need a speculation for what could have caused the luminol splotch of mixed DNA in Filomena's room, try this one:

First off, this trace is described more as a random splotch or splash without any desernable pattern. What makes such a trace? I'm going to suggest either a wadded up cloth like a towel or liquid dripping to the floor like when a wet towel is wrung out. We can take Amanda's towel from the small bath, use it to dry Rudy's pants and foot, use it to wipe down the inside of the shower, then walk out of the bath and into the original crime scene and wring out the towel. This puts all three components in place: Amanda's DNA, Meredith's DNA from her blood and water to dilute the mixture and splash it to the floor with no need for magic coincidences to put them together and no flying to leave the isolated trace.

How about this: At some point in the past few weeks Amanda walked barefoot in the house. An anther time Meredith walked barefoot in the house. Somebody (Filomena?) steps on the DNA of each and tracks it into Filomena's room.

Or this. At some point in the past few weeks Amanda walks barefoot in her bathroom and hallway. Meredith picks up Amanda's DNA on Meredith's own bare foot, walks into Filomena's room to look out the window, close the open window (it's getting cold), check the time, or any of a number of legitimite reasons to be there, and leaves her own DNA trace and Amanda's DNA trace on Filomena's floor.

 

[Strozzi]

The project of interrogation is not to be fair, balanced or objective to begin with.

Interrogations are about one thing and one thing only.

Confession. Interrogations are not about solving the case or gathering the evidence, interrogations are about getting the likely perp in the room and accusing them, bullying them, Reid Techniquing them... all for the purpose of confession. They will get you to think of how it might have been done and cut off at the pass ANY talk that you might be innocent. They are not interested in that - and the "they" in that is ANY interrogator.

Remember that 19 times out f 20 they have the perp in the room.

Interrogations are not about solving the crime, they are about getting the person in the room to admit they are involved in the crime. Nothing more, nothing less.

Is that true even in Italy?

 

[moije2]

This discussion about pornography is ridiculous. Italy has a very prolific pornographic industry and many italian directors produce films with a sadistic bent.

I mean, there was even a famous italian pornographic actress who was a member of the italian parliament. How much mainstream can you get?

And this is ignoring the popular "giallo" movie genre, where violence is eroticized and the killer is usually a woman. Coincidence? You decide.

And this Machiavelly guy is trying to paint Rafaelle as a sinister person for watching porn? Don't make me laugh. Italy is drenched in porn. He himself admited has much earlier in this thread.

Thanks for a dose of reality. So now, could there still be a crazy twist where under italian law looking at porn is illegal? Or was that incorrect? I have learn to not be surprised by anything in this case.

 

[Strozzi]

This discussion about pornography is ridiculous. Italy has a very prolific pornographic industry and many italian directors produce films with a sadistic bent.

I'm not getting any of it from my Internet Service Provider (ISP). I better change provider.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

nonexistent trophy knife

There is no probative significance that a man of about 24 who began carrying a pocketknife as a 13 year old schoolboy in Bari (where most boys in his social circle also carried a knife) still routinely carried a pocketknife at age 24. Nor is there criminal meaning in having a trophy fighting knife hanging on his wall.

As far as I have been able to learn, the trophy fighting knife story as told at the pseudo-wiki on this case is false. It was a demonstration knife, according to an article in the Daily Telegraph.

 

[yimyammer]

You have Amanda walking barefoot into a room with obvious broken glass.

I'm not thinking of obvious broken glass particles but those tiny ones I'm sure you've encountered when you broke a glass on the floor and thought you had everything cleaned up and then stepped on a tiny shard and felt a slight pain in your foot.

I haven't seen the photo of this evidence, so if it was a big blob then that would render my scenario moot

Why would Rudy go and ring out a cloth in Filomena's room?

 

[Onofarar]

"The Baron". Apparently a nickname linked to a famous US basketballer named "Byron" - can't remember his surname.

My guess is the nickname may refer to Baron Davis a guard for UCLA who was drafted in the first round (3rd overall) in 1999 by the Charlotte Hornets.
Two time NBA All Star - won Skills Competition at 2004 All Star game.

 

[Strozzi]

She could have rubbed the sock against Meredith's panties and it would have been just as incriminating.

I'm only guessing as to what happened. I think it was probably intentional tampering, but it could have been accidental given the way the crime scene had been trashed.

I believe the quantity of Raffaele's DNA that Stefanoni reported on the bra clasp hook suggests it was robust contact, not just faint contamination. As I understand it, contamination usually involves an extremely small amount of DNA - much less than you would ordinarily find from robust direct contact. A good wipe or 2 or 3 of the bra clasp hook with Raffaele's sock, handkerchief, shirt cuff, toothbrush, or comb/hair brush ought to do it. Wouldn't you think?

 

[Sergei Walankov]

According to Nina Burleigh's book, The Baron was "a nickname he chose that Italians mispronounced - meant to be 'Byron' - for NBA star Byron Scott".

 

[kwill]

Thanks for a dose of reality. So now, could there still be a crazy twist where under italian law looking at porn is illegal? Or was that incorrect? I have learn to not be surprised by anything in this case.

Wikipedia:

The legal status of pornography itself is disputed in Italy. Technically, all production and distribution of pornography in the country is forbidden per Articles 528, 529, and 725 of the Italian Penal Code, which respectively sanction as felonies "Obscene publications and shows", "Obscene activities and objects", and "Commerce of publications, images or other objects offending public decency". In the 1980s, several courts in Italy enforced these laws, ordering confiscation of pornographic material in their jurisdictions.

What a country!

 

[acbytesla]

Let's clearify some things that you said in the last times which are incorrect.

Sollecito's collection does not consist of two pocket knifes. He had a whole collection, was very fond of knifes and was a knife carrier:

I'm a knife carrier. My dad was a knife carrier, all my brothers carry knives. My best friend a Seattle Police Officer is also a knife carrier. His brother is a knife carrier. Owning and carrying a pocket knife is not strange and does not make the carrier in any way violent. The idea that it does is dumb and moronic.

 

[Samson]

I find a quote from Carlo Pacelli (Patrick Lumumba's attorney) by Amanda:

"So who is Amanda Knox? In my opinion, within her resides a double soul - the angelic and compassionate, gentle and naive one, of Saint Maria Goretti, and the satanic, diabolic Luciferina, who was brought to engage in extreme, borderline acts and to adopt dissolute behavior. "

Page 356 of 457. Location 4474 of 5843. Kindle version of Waiting to Be Heard.

Not that Mignini might not have said it as well. Or at least adopted such comment. Anyway, there goes that "satan" thing again...

Maybe Mignini's momma read him these GK Chesterton stories at bedtime.

From Wikipedia

"some stories, such as "The Miracle of Moon Crescent", "The Oracle of the Dog", "The Blast of the Book" and "The Dagger With Wings", poke fun at initially sceptical characters who become convinced of a supernatural explanation for some strange occurrence, while Father Brown easily sees the perfectly ordinary, natural explanation."

 

[Bill Williams]

Is that true even in Italy?

Truly, I'm no expert, but evertything I've seen in the past two years about false confessions, etc., as well as interrogations in general say the same thing.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrogation

Note that interviews of witnesses and victims use differing techniques with other objectives, mainly information gathering.......

Interrogation (also called questioning or interpellation) is interviewing as commonly employed by officers of the police, military, and Intelligence agencies with the goal of extracting a confession or incriminating statements. Subjects of interrogation are often suspects involved in crimes. Information from victims and witnesses is usually obtained through interviews.

or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_technique

When the Reid Technique shifts into interrogation mode, it's slightly different than normal interrogation, although with the same goal.

"Interrogation," on the other hand, is an accusatory process — accusatory only in the sense that the investigator tells the suspect that there is no doubt as to his guilt. The interrogation is in the form of a monologue presented by the investigator, rather than a question and answer format.

Critics of the technique claim it too easily produces false confessions,especially with children. The use of the Reid technique on youth is prohibited in several European countries because of the incidence of false confessions and wrongful convictions that result.

In Canada, a Provincial Court Judge ruled in 2012 that "stripped to its bare essentials, the Reid Technique is a guilt-presumptive, confrontational, psychologically manipulative procedure whose purpose is to extract a confession." John E. Reid and Associates maintains that "it’s not the technique that causes false or coerced confessions but police detectives who apply improper interrogation procedures."[6]

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

This discussion about pornography is ridiculous. Italy has a very prolific pornographic industry and many italian directors produce films with a sadistic bent.

I mean, there was even a famous italian pornographic actress who was a member of the italian parliament. How much mainstream can you get?

And this is ignoring the popular "giallo" movie genre, where violence is eroticized and the killer is usually a woman. Coincidence? You decide.

And this Machiavelly guy is trying to paint Rafaelle as a sinister person for watching porn? Don't make me laugh. Italy is drenched in porn. He himself admited has much earlier in this thread.

Headline: Porn Sites Get More Visitors Each Month than Netflix, Amazon and Twitter Combined

Summary: Porn consumes 30 percent of Internet bandwidth. 70 percent of men and 30 percent of women watch porn.

This is the world we live in, and it is supposed to be evidence that someone is a murderer???

The police got Raffaele's laptop, and they searched his apartment. What did they find? They found a Japanese comic book about vampires. And they found a guy to testify that Raffaele was in possession of porn at some point in the past. "It was violent! It was extreme!" Was it? We'll never know, because all we have is this vague hearsay. There is no actual porn, extreme or otherwise, in the case evidence.

And if there were, it would still prove NOTHING. Talk about desperation...

 

[Bill Williams]

Headline: Porn Sites Get More Visitors Each Month than Netflix, Amazon and Twitter Combined

Summary: Porn consumes 30 percent of Internet bandwidth. 70 percent of men and 30 percent of women watch porn.

This is the world we live in, and it is supposed to be evidence that someone is a murderer???

The police got Raffaele's laptop, and they searched his apartment. What did they find? They found a Japanese comic book about vampires. And they found a guy to testify that Raffaele was in possession of porn at some point in the past. "It was violent! It was extreme!" Was it? We'll never know, because all we have is this vague hearsay. There is no actual porn, extreme or otherwise, in the case evidence.

And if there were, it would still prove NOTHING. Talk about desperation...

Charlie - can you think of an item Machiavelli has presented in the past two months which does not have this sort of desperation associated with it?

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

I believe the quantity of Raffaele's DNA that Stefanoni reported on the bra clasp hook suggests it was robust contact, not just faint contamination. As I understand it, contamination usually involves an extremely small amount of DNA - much less than you would ordinarily find from robust direct contact. A good wipe or 2 or 3 of the bra clasp hook with Raffaele's sock, handkerchief, shirt cuff, toothbrush, or comb/hair brush ought to do it. Wouldn't you think?

The DNA transfer research Halides has posted suggests it could have been anything. It wasn't low template per se, but it was measured in nanograms, billionths of grams, and it's not associated with any specific cellular material that was detected when the item was examined. It was a microscopic, invisible trace.

Raffaele's fingerprints were on the outside of Meredith's door. Did he try the handle, gripping it hard in an attempt to force the latch? If he did, and one of the gloved investigators handled that door knob before handling the clasp, that could do it. If he sneezed or coughed at the cottage, someone could have transferred his DNA from the floor if they stepped on the clasp. It can't be ruled out as a completely random event. But I think it is more likely they did something to put it there.