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

[Diocletus]

Thanks, I need to correct that. It was a purse, not a shopping bag.

What I mean is, how careful is a burglar who just made a huge mess by breaking a window going to be? If he came in the window, he already had to step on a bunch of stuff under the window, so why is he going out of his way to leave that purse there, instead of kicking it out of the way or, better yet, searching through it and then throwing it on the bed or the floor? And if it was dark, how does he not trip on it when it is directly between him and the door?

Look at the 11th and 12th pictures here: http://www.injusticeinperugia.org/RonHendry------2.html

Filomena could have put that there.

 

[Grinder]

Mary, we can't understand or explain every little thing. The real important fact is that Meredith was killed before food started to transit from her stomach into her duodenum. We know that had to commence, absence illness, by about 9:30 pm or so. In fact, the commencement of the process was already on the late side at 9 pm. She was killed before it commenced. A & S were not there. Rudy was.

Neither PGP or PIP can or need to explain every detail. This is why I don't go off on Massei's 'mistakes' or Hellmann's.

The digestive evidence is an add on. They could have eaten at 6:30 and Meredith might have waited for the pizza to cool or for some other reason she may started a little late. The literature allows for 4 hours for the process to start. The digestive evidence is totally consistent with TOD before 10:15 which all the other evidence points to.

I believe Rudy climbed through Filomena's window into a dark room, did not turn on a light, touched a few things and felt in a drawer, but did not do a detailed search. I think it is likely that he quickly went into the living area to get an idea of the flat's layout, see where the front door is, perhaps peak out a window. Not being in a hurry, he probably thought he had time to search each room that interested him and gather valuables. I believe he may have bumped into or knocked over a chair in the dark. He also opened the refrigerator. He may have had a knife with him. If not, he may have grabbed one from a kitchen drawer.

If he entered through the window, he could just close the shutters and turn on a light. He would be in a hurry as he couldn't know Meredith and Amanda wouldn't coming home.

Rudy was in the toilet when Meredith entered. When he heard someone at the front door, his self-preservation instinct would have been to douse the bathroom light (if he had in fact turned it on), close the bathroom door if it was open and if he could get to it fast enough, and pull out his knife.

Maybe. He could have been let in by Meredith. We really don't know and don't have to know. What is needed to known is that they didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt the kids were guilty.

We don't know what happened next. Don't know if Meredith saw or heard (or smelled) someone on the toilet. Or if she saw the knocked-over chair and got scared. Perhaps she saw and sensed nothing and was at her bed and Rudy barged in her room. Only Rudy knows that.

And his accomplices Clearly if A and R could have done it without leaving anything behind someone else could have as well.

 

[Mary_H]

Filomena could have put that there.

You're right. And what good are crime scene photos when you allow someone to go in and make changes to the scene before you take the pictures.

 

[toto]

The Independent (U.K.)

This is a bit dispiriting:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-have-guilty-verdicts-reinstated-9072880.html

Legal experts in Italy expressed surprise at the level of criticism the Perugia Appeals court directed at the original verdict. This seems to have been reflected by the Supreme Court’s remarks as it ordered the current retrial.

Several criminal law experts have told The Independent that they believe it is likely the original murder verdicts will be re-instated. This is at odds with defence assertions and those of some independent observers, who say prosecutors have failed to show beyond reasonable doubt that the pair were involved in the killing.

 

[Mary_H]

Neither PGP or PIP can or need to explain every detail. This is why I don't go off on Massei's 'mistakes' or Hellmann's.

The digestive evidence is an add on. They could have eaten at 6:30 and Meredith might have waited for the pizza to cool or for some other reason she may started a little late. The literature allows for 4 hours for the process to start. The digestive evidence is totally consistent with TOD before 10:15 which all the other evidence points to.

Besides, the judges have always disregarded any science they don't want to be troubled by.

<snip>Maybe. He could have been let in by Meredith. We really don't know and don't have to know. What is needed to [be] known is that they didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt the kids were guilty.<snip>

Precisely.

 

[Diocletus]

The Fingernails

As I understand, the prosecution is arguing that the lack of suspect DNA in Kercher's fingernails shows multiple attackers (supposedly because she was held down and could not fight back).

However, this article: http://www.isfg.org/files/c00bcc01cb100cc782903dbff9c250a74a5c54fd.02003163_771281642656.pdf reports a study in which 95% of the fingernail analyses returned only the victim's DNA (that's the case with the Kercher samples) and only 5% had the suspect's DNA.

Further, this article raises the question: why didn't Stefanoni do a Y-DNA analysis on the fingernails?

 

[Bill Williams]

This is a bit dispiriting:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-have-guilty-verdicts-reinstated-9072880.html

Legal experts in Italy expressed surprise at the level of criticism the Perugia Appeals court directed at the original verdict. This seems to have been reflected by the Supreme Court’s remarks as it ordered the current retrial.

Several criminal law experts have told The Independent that they believe it is likely the original murder verdicts will be re-instated. This is at odds with defence assertions and those of some independent observers, who say prosecutors have failed to show beyond reasonable doubt that the pair were involved in the killing.

What will be the tale of the tape....

.... is if the pair are convicted.... what will the papers say then? Like The Independent, will they "come out" full bore that it was a wrongful conviction? There has been a remarkable reversal in the media; a reversal even Andrea Vogt cannot blame on the massive PR supertanker. (I mean, Harry Rag, blogger extrordinaire is bragging that he has contacted every news outlet with the obviousness of Knox's guilt!)

I cannot remember which newspaper just yesterday said some correct things about this, the third trial. However, it could not help itself in vilifying Knox, saying something to the effect of, "As soon as she was out of jail in 2011, Knox dumped Sollecito." Sheesh.

But given the turn around in the media.... what will they say after a Jan 30 conviction? Let's hope there is not a conviction....

 

[Mary_H]

As I understand, the prosecution is arguing that the lack of suspect DNA in Kercher's fingernails shows multiple attackers (supposedly because she was held down and could not fight back).

However, this article: http://www.isfg.org/files/c00bcc01cb100cc782903dbff9c250a74a5c54fd.02003163_771281642656.pdf reports a study in which 95% of the fingernail analyses returned only the victim's DNA (that's the case with the Kercher samples) and only 5% had the suspect's DNA.

Further, this article raises the question: why didn't Stefanoni do a Y-DNA analysis on the fingernails?

The story used to be that Meredith's fingernails were too short for her to have dug into anything with them.

 

[MDDVS]

This is a bit dispiriting:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-have-guilty-verdicts-reinstated-9072880.html

Legal experts in Italy expressed surprise at the level of criticism the Perugia Appeals court directed at the original verdict. This seems to have been reflected by the Supreme Court’s remarks as it ordered the current retrial.

Several criminal law experts have told The Independent that they believe it is likely the original murder verdicts will be re-instated. This is at odds with defence assertions and those of some independent observers, who say prosecutors have failed to show beyond reasonable doubt that the pair were involved in the killing.

Yes, this is an aspect many of you don't realise. All the investigation, the illegal interrogation, the trials, everything was just business as usual in Italy. Those kind of illogical arguments, just what always happens, what they are used to. So it's no surprise that those "legal experts" were surprised by Hellman's veredict and reasoning. I think they were literally suprised.

 

[Diocletus]

The Cat's Blood

If Stefanoni was so sure that the samples she describes as "cat's blood" were in fact blood from a cat, then why did she submit them to a quantification process that detects only human DNA?

Further, when she quantified the "cat's blood," and found that some of the samples were positive for human DNA, why did she not analyze the human DNA?

 

[acbytesla]

Paranoia will destroy ya

I've seen a lot of posts from commenters that I respect a lot which "read between the lines" that a certain guilty verdict is in store for the two protagonists. They notice comments made by Nencini as foreboding when in fact they may just be routine.

I don't read Italian or Italian legalese and I'm not in the courtroom so I'm confident that much of the meaning gets lost by the time it reaches our little forum.

I want to be optimistic about these proceedings and I certainly can see given the ISC motivation that many of PIP is worried. I am too, but I think it is a huge mistake for us so far from the action to try and decode every word.

 

[andreajo]

I've seen a lot of posts from commenters that I respect a lot which "read between the lines" that a certain guilty verdict is in store for the two protagonists. They notice comments made by Nencini as foreboding when in fact they may just be routine.

I don't read Italian or Italian legalese and I'm not in the courtroom so I'm confident that much of the meaning gets lost by the time it reaches our little forum.

I want to be optimistic about these proceedings and I certainly can see given the ISC motivation that many of PIP is worried. I am too, but I think it is a huge mistake for us so far from the action to try and decode every word.

I agree. There have been plenty of surprises so far in this long and winding court process. We can't really read Nencini's mind based on a couple of tweets and some news stories. And talking heads! Don't get me started!

 

[Antony]

They don't think at all, I would say. It's pointless, really, to be looking for any sign of logical thinking amongst the guilters when it comes to Amanda Knox.

I'm more worried than ever. I think the outcome will be bad. Hopefully, they will fight this.

I've a feeling that the court will convict Amanda and acquit Raffaele, except for convicting him of assisting an offender, or such. Sentence for him will be time served.

 

[Antony]

Not sure about this high lighted item. "Whore of a doper" may be a literal translation from Italian to English. I don't speak Italian although picking it up slowly. I can state with certainty that in French for instance they do not use the "F" word for emphasis preceding a word (in this case "doper"). Rather they use the the word for "whore". Sorry to be so cryptic here - I got some sort of notice from the mods about trying to avoid the auto censor. Little ole me!

This use in French at least is ubiquitous, and from my limited experience the English aren't shy about salty language either. So just type in "putain d'un drogué" to google translate... Maybe this is true in Italian also. Someone else can verify before we march further down this path.

Hope I don't get my wrists slapped again!

So basically Rudy is reporting what he thinks Meredith would have said if she had been speaking Italian. Ho hum ...

 

[Grinder]

I've seen a lot of posts from commenters that I respect a lot which "read between the lines" that a certain guilty verdict is in store for the two protagonists. They notice comments made by Nencini as foreboding when in fact they may just be routine.

I don't read Italian or Italian legalese and I'm not in the courtroom so I'm confident that much of the meaning gets lost by the time it reaches our little forum.

I want to be optimistic about these proceedings and I certainly can see given the ISC motivation that many of PIP is worried. I am too, but I think it is a huge mistake for us so far from the action to try and decode every word.

I agree. There have been plenty of surprises so far in this long and winding court process. We can't really read Nencini's mind based on a couple of tweets and some news stories. And talking heads! Don't get me started!

The first trial was not a total surprise as the judge wouldn't consider or reconsider requests by the defense. He also allow in prosecution evidence and witnesses that weren't credible or to a reasonable standard. He also let the calumnia/defamation trial run concurrently thereby letting in the statements. He let Mignini read the tab story about the noise ticket.

In the Hellmann trial when the independent experts were appointed things looked encouraging. When the video was shown in court and Curatolo was questioned things looked even better. The verdict was not a huge surprise.

This court did not allow reasonable requests from the defense, the putative semen stain being one. I hope the pattern will be broken but it is natural to prepare for a negative outcome.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

YSTR and fingernail clippings

As I understand, the prosecution is arguing that the lack of suspect DNA in Kercher's fingernails shows multiple attackers (supposedly because she was held down and could not fight back).

However, this article: http://www.isfg.org/files/c00bcc01cb100cc782903dbff9c250a74a5c54fd.02003163_771281642656.pdf reports a study in which 95% of the fingernail analyses returned only the victim's DNA (that's the case with the Kercher samples) and only 5% had the suspect's DNA.

Further, this article raises the question: why didn't Stefanoni do a Y-DNA analysis on the fingernails?

I agree about the YSTR analysis being very helpful with respect to fingernails: "It was found that 63% of the samples analysed using Yfiler produced full or partial Y-STR profiles." But suppose that this had been done and had also come back negative. Arguing from the lack of DNA in the fingernails or anywhere else has some problems, one of which is that the DNA amplification may fail due to the presence of an inhibitor.

For argument's sake let us assume that Meredith's bruises were swabbed, as they should have been. If they came back negative for DNA from AK or RS, then would the prosecution agree that the lack of DNA is exculpatory? I doubt it. I have heard PGP say words to the effect, "In strangulation simulations, the "perp's" DNA is found only two-thirds of the time."

EDT
The more I think about the original argument, the less it works logically. If DNA in the fingernails does not show profiles from Knox and Sollecito, then they are guilty. If DNA in the fingernails does show profiles from Knox and Sollecito, then they are guilty...

 

[Grinder]

I agree about the YSTR analysis being very helpful with respect to fingernails: "It was found that 63% of the samples analysed using Yfiler produced full or partial Y-STR profiles." But suppose that this had been done and had also come back negative. Arguing from the lack of DNA in the fingernails or anywhere else has some problems, one of which is that the DNA amplification may fail due to the presence of an inhibitor.

However, suppose we assume that Meredith's bruises were swabbed, as they should have been. If they came back negative for DNA from AK or RS, then would the prosecution agree that the lack of DNA is exculpatory? I doubt it. I have also heard PGP say words to the effect, "In strangulation simulations, the "perp's" DNA is found only two-thirds of the time."

EDT
The more I think about the original argument, the less it works logically. If DNA in the fingernails does not show profiles from Knox and Sollecito, then they are guilty. If DNA in the fingernails does show profiles from Knox and Sollecito, then they are guilty...

And once again the point means nothing regarding the kids' guilt or innocence. If she were held down, it doesn't mean they had anything to do with it. Now if their DNA was legitimately found under her nails I'd shift to guilt. The fact that none of DNA was found under the nails OR on her clothes makes the kids look innocent.

IIRC this is where a PGP comes along with they did it naked with gloves and a swimming cap on. Did Curatolo mention them wearing rubber gloves and swim caps?

The amount of Amanda's DNA found everywhere but Meredith's room makes me think she is a DNA shedder, if such a thing exists, and would have left an abundant amount on Meredith's clothes and skin.

 

[andreajo]

The first trial was not a total surprise as the judge wouldn't consider or reconsider requests by the defense. He also allow in prosecution evidence and witnesses that weren't credible or to a reasonable standard. He also let the calumnia/defamation trial run concurrently thereby letting in the statements. He let Mignini read the tab story about the noise ticket.

In the Hellmann trial when the independent experts were appointed things looked encouraging. When the video was shown in court and Curatolo was questioned things looked even better. The verdict was not a huge surprise.

This court did not allow reasonable requests from the defense, the putative semen stain being one. I hope the pattern will be broken but it is natural to prepare for a negative outcome.

Did Hellman also decline the putative semen test? (Not going bananas, I just want to know)

 

[katy_did]

That's funny, but as you know now the Defense wraps up the 30th, so Im assuming they had made arrangements due to scheduling earlier.

The lawyers leaving was probably only shocking to those (like me) left relying on two PGP reporters tweets.

Hopefully Frank will write a article of another perspective and give another view. Of course, Andrea and Barbie probably added their known bias to their reporting tweets.

The defences (Raffaele's definitely, and I think Amanda's as well) did the same thing last time, so I can only think it's a tactic. Very hard to believe they wouldn't do the rebuttals themselves if they thought it might influence things one way or another. I notice Barbie only made three (pretty bitchy) tweets about what the substitutes actually said!

 

[acbytesla]

The first trial was not a total surprise as the judge wouldn't consider or reconsider requests by the defense. He also allow in prosecution evidence and witnesses that weren't credible or to a reasonable standard. He also let the calumnia/defamation trial run concurrently thereby letting in the statements. He let Mignini read the tab story about the noise ticket.

In the Hellmann trial when the independent experts were appointed things looked encouraging. When the video was shown in court and Curatolo was questioned things looked even better. The verdict was not a huge surprise.

This court did not allow reasonable requests from the defense, the putative semen stain being one. I hope the pattern will be broken but it is natural to prepare for a negative outcome.

I understand Grinder. But the truth is Nencini only really allowed the new evidence that the ISC demanded to be looked at. It did and that didn't really shine any new light on the case and if anything the testimony from the analyst from the RIS was very positive for the defense.

Don't misunderstand me Grinder, I don't know how this court case is leaning. But I really believe that no one else here knows either.