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

[Diocletus]

Who is this girl Kelsey Kay, and what is her agenda?

A definite rabbit boiler.

 

[Dan O.]

Home is the sailor, home from the sea! Welcome back, Honorable anglolawyer. You were missed.

I will try this at home the first chance I get. To be honest, I thought YOU were the one who told me the pieces were lined up. I am going to hunt down that post.....

I still don't see any reason to put them on the ledge when it would be so much easier to toss them on the ground. Off to look at the pictures again....

When the rock is tossed through the window, Rudy can be hiding behind the retaining wall and shadowed from any street lighting. If there is any response he can run out the back of the yard and into the woods below. But when he is picking the glass out of the window to reach the latch he is exposed. He will try to be quiet which means not dropping large fragments of glass where they could shatter on rocks or other pieces of glass and draw attention to his activity.

 

[bri1]

Events that happened (or supposedly happened) in spring last year are referenced. The timing of these stories makes me extremely sceptical and annoyed.

 

[Diocletus]

Events that happened (or supposedly happened) in spring last year are referenced. The timing of these stories makes me extremely sceptical and annoyed.

Whatever it is, it has nothing to do with how Meredith Kercher died.

 

[anglolawyer]

This word should clearly never be used if it has wholly contradictory definitions.

Such words are called 'auto-antonyms' apparently (source: google). Aloha in Hawaiian means both hello and goodbye, for example.

Ciao

 

[Dan O.]

She had no internet connection at the cottage. Uploading anything was not so straightforward.
OTOH obviously she had to put the photos into her laptop for viewing.

We had this a zillion times before Katody. I think she did have internet access. The source escapes me (but I will find it). It might be Barbie quoting Amanda in a MySpace entry or an email home.

I quoted the MySpace page not long ago.

im in love. the house has a kitchen, 2 bathrooms, and four bathrooms. not to mention a washing maschine, and internet access.

But we hear later that they get a washing machine in mid october (repaired by Laura's handyman friend) and Amanda has been frequenting an internet cafe where she met Spiros.



Finally...A Little Bit of Italy 
Current mood: thoughtful 

Wow. Sorry about the wait. I've been taking care of life. I've actually been living in Italy for about a month now and I've had classes for two weeks so far. Everything is going great. My house is awesome, we just got a washing machine the other day, though it was borken. Luckily, Laura started dating a hadnyman so he came over and fixed it for us. I didnt Know he spent the night until in the morning when he walked out of the bathroom in his underwear. Unfortunately i burst out laughing, not because he's scrawny or anything, but because Laura had been complaining a couple days previously that she hadnt gotten laid in a long time. Forsa Laura!

There is no internet hardware apparent in any of the photos upstairs. The boys downstairs might have something but this is never mentioned.

Amanda is using Raffaele's computer when she sends the email home on November 4.

ETA: No internet at the cottage

QUESTION - So you used the computer at home ?
ANSWER - Yes, yes, but each had its staff.
QUESTION - is clear . There was free internet?
ANSWER - No.
QUESTION - How did you download your mail or surf the
internet?
ANSWER - Everyone mending as he could, going in
internet point.

 

[bri1]

Whatever it is, it has nothing to do with how Meredith Kercher died.

Indeed.
But it feels very much like an attempt to smear and influence the trial. ugh.

 

[Grinder]

This word should clearly never be used if it has wholly contradictory definitions.

 

[Diocletus]

Indeed.
But it feels very much like an attempt to smear and influence the trial. ugh.

I wonder where Kelsey Hoffman has been recently. I mean Chelsea Hoffman.

 

[Grinder]

The first move of the rock climber was to hop off the wall of the parking area onto the slope below. This was an eye opener because I had previously assumed that there was a vertical retaining wall all the way down to the lower ground level. The slope gives an intermediate elevation which is better suited for the rock toss than either the lower yard level or the parking level. This is no more than hopping down from the bed of a truck which I've done in the past couple of weeks.

Well since we discussed this before you know I meant the first move going up not down.

The second move is stepping from the opposing slope onto the lower window sill. Not much different than stepping across a narrow stream except that he had the window grate to grab on the other side. Did the climber ever step in the grass or dirt? I know I try to keep the soles of my shoes clean while climbing on boulders.

See above

From there it is not much different than climbing to the top step of a ladder (the one with the label that says: "do not step or stand here, you could loose your balance and fall". Of course, the window is safer because it is well supported by the building. I did that last fall picking apples from atop a tall ladder.

No that's what the lawyer did. The rock climber coiled and then uncoiled to grab the sill.

The dynamic move crouching down to propel yourself up to grab a ledge just out of reach, I did that last summer to verify that I still could and pulled myself up to the top of the ledge. But the dynamic move wasn't necessary as the ledge of the upper window could be reached while still holding the lower casement with one hand. This is not unlike what I did while picking apples when I reached up to grab a higher branch for support while I stood atop the ladder.

What ledge did you do this on? Go review the lawyer demonstration.

 

[Bill Williams]

This word should clearly never be used if it has wholly contradictory definitions.

Such words are called 'auto-antonyms' apparently (source: google). Aloha in Hawaiian means both hello and goodbye, for example.

Ciao

I shall endeavour never to say "aloha" again.... nor "clip", "fast", "peruse", "oversight", or "weather". But will stubbornly cling to "factoid", as it is such an appropriate word to describe the pro-guilt evidence...

 

[toto]

Such words are called 'auto-antonyms' apparently (source: google). Aloha in Hawaiian means both hello and goodbye, for example.

Ciao

Fair enough, but context helps in your example! In the UK there is a radio show (Steve Wright in the afternoon) in which last time I listened they do a bit in which interesting "factoids" are told. I always assumed they meant interesting facts of the "did you know?" variety. I obviously must be more alert now when I hear or read the word!

 

[toto]

Indeed.
But it feels very much like an attempt to smear and influence the trial. ugh.

I wasn't going to raise this as it was highlighted on other sides, but since you mention it, she does not come across as very nice, and Rafaelle again displays his naivety. Not at all sure about some of the factoids (!) either.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

sanction

Such words are called 'auto-antonyms' apparently (source: google). Aloha in Hawaiian means both hello and goodbye, for example.

Ciao

"Sanction" seems to fall into the same category. As far as auto-antonyms, how about "Yugo" and "car?"

 

[Bill Williams]

Indeed.
But it feels very much like an attempt to smear and influence the trial. ugh.

I wasn't going to raise this as it was highlighted on other sides, but since you mention it, she does not come across as very nice, and Rafaelle again displays his naivety. Not at all sure about some of the factoids (!) either.

Bri1 - I am astonished! You're not suggesting that someone would use smears to influence a trial, are you!? Shocking!

Talk about factoids.

 

[Strozzi]

It is hard to believe, as is everything about this case, that they did not look for footprints in the bedroom. But then they didn't want to know whether anyone had come in through the window.

ETA: It's still not much evidence a burglar walked through the room, Strozzi.

Your right. Not much evidence, but some thanks to Ron Hendry's detailed examination of photographic evidence. If the forensic police had checked thoroughly they might have found more.

I note you comment a few posts above about glass being lined up as if placed in a position. Are you aware that the burglar who threw a rock through the lawyers' office window actually laid several pieces of broken glass on a table or desktop as if assembling them together like a jigsaw puzzle? That is not something that a burglar normally does, but when Rudy breaks into a place he does odd things - he's in no hurry to leave, he eats and sometimes even cooks a meal. He sleeps there. He uses the toilet. He uses the person's computer. He is in no hurry to leave. I suspect that Rudy has a screw loose.

 

[Kaosium]

As for the trial documentation: I said that the data requested to Stefanoni are not included in the trial files. I think I used the expression "included/deposited in investigation file" or included in technical reports. And I mean specifically the SAL, egrams and raw data.

This that I state could be theoretically verifiable, because Stefanoni herself states - before Micheli - that she would never include this documentation in the file, in any case. If you decide to make a research in documentation from other cases (prior to 2008) you might find out that what I report is true.

Hence, nothing was hidden.

Uh, yeah, it was! You just admitted that she had no expectation that if she omitted the TMB negatives that they would ever come to light, "she would never include this documentation in the file."

Whithout doubt, it is not. (your interpretation of it as a 'lie' would be irrelevant anyway, this must be said; and bear in mind that TMB test results themselves are logically irrelevant).

The TMB results are not logically irrelevant, you are making the mistake that because it's peroxidase-like activity of heme which causes the reaction in both tests, that they must be exactly the same. However the properties of other substances outside heme also cause a reaction, and they differ between TMB and luminol which makes the combination of luminol and TMB superior as that which gives a false positive to luminol may not do so with TMB and vice-versa. If they were indeed logically irrelevant it would beg the question as to why ILE did them in the first place, not to mention all the other organizations who use TMB in combination with luminol. Here's where it is advised that luminol testing be followed up with another presumptive test like TMB:

It is advised that if a positive reaction with luminol is achieved, the stained area should be checked again with another reagent such as tetramethylbenzidine, phenolphthalein, or orthotolidine and always confirmed with a human-specific confirmatory test for blood [23].

Instead Stefanoni failed to do a confirmatory test and didn't report the TMB negatives and did so with the expectation they would never be reported.

There are other omissions in her technical report, some of which are irrelevant. But let's look at the point.

To me, it is not, because, 1) the test themselves were accessible to the defence experts (they were summoned to attend the tests).

Machiavelli, the defense doesn't just need to attend the tests, more importantly they need the results of those tests!

Because 2) it was Stefanoni herself who provided the documentation about TMB tests; if you assume she intended to falsify the data, then why didn't she fabricate fake positive records, or why didn't she just withhold them or destroy them?

She did withhold the results, as for why she didn't destroy the records or fabricate something when forced to cough up the raw records, that might be because she thinks prison would really suck? There was no consequence to her 'forgetting' to report them, so why would she take the chance someone on that team would remember and testify to that fact, or that there might be video evidence of the tests being administered?

Stefanoni's offering documentation of negative results is inconsistent with a theory of an alleged intent to conceal such data.

She didn't offer that documentation, it was released by order of the judge when the defense determined that there were missing records, which happened as I recall when Comodi said something about the bra clasp DNA amount being 1.4 ngs and the defense realizing they didn't have any documentation to that effect and demanding to see those records.

She did not "had the expectation" as you say, because she provided them.

That was quite a plethora of disorganized paperwork, she may not even have known the TMB negatives were amongst them. She also only provided them when they were caught not providing them but there being useful data there regarding the DNA tests, leading to the release of what Amanda (and others) referred to as the 'raw data.'

Then it is not a deception also because 3) she had testified about having performed the TMB tests, she talked about them even before depositing her RTIGF with Massei's court, she said tests were performed and answered all questions thoroughly with no problem.

Obviously she had to testify about having performed TMB tests, considering all the ones she had done and the fact they would be using them in court. In fact, here's an interesting little tidbit from her testifying on TMB in the preliminary hearing:

Professor Tagliabracci, specified, without being refuted (hearing of July 18 2009, p. 174), that the tetramethylbenzedine (TMB) test is very sensitive, so much as to give a positive result even with only five red blood cells present Dr. Stefanoni herself, moreover, clarified (preliminary hearing of October 4 2008) that, while a positive test result could be deceptive due to reactivity of the chemical [evidenziatore] with other substances, a negative result gives certainty that no blood is present.(bolding mine)

What we are specifically talking about is the TMB negatives on the luminol hits that she failed to include in the RTIGF, not all the TMB results in there she did report. I'd say her above statement suggests why she might want to hide the results of those particular tests.

Your entire argument is reduced to complaining that Stefanoni did not write down about the TMB tests in the technical report she provided to the defence on the preliminary investigation phase. I have my theory about why this information was not included at the early stage, and I found this to be totally insufficient as to object to Stefanoni's work.

I have my theory too, let's hear yours now.

It is also false to assert that Stefanoni declared she ever found the luminol footprints were in blood for sure. She acually declared something opposite to that:

In such passages Stefanoni points out that luminol is only presumptive and she can't say it's blood.

Which becomes significantly more likely it's not blood when combined with the results of a negative TMB test, especially the way Stefanoni put it above.

As far as I know, what you find in Stefanoni's testimony is: Ghirga asks some questions that are clearly only about the specific confirmatory test for blood (pages 58-59 of May 23.) it is very clear that these questions are only abot confirmatory tests; Maori asks whether other tests were performed on a specific spot on the corridoor floor adjacent to the bathroom door, and Stefanoni answered they only sprayed luminol there (p. 148 may 23.); Maori asks about TMB tests on the bra clasp (p. 159). I am not aware about other questions and answers on the point, but I may have missed them.

As we both know they didn't just spray luminol there, they did TMB tsts which were negative. However on May 23rd the records showing the negative TMB had not yet been released so when Stefanoni says this she does so having successfully hidden the TMB negatives which would show she was lying.

 

[Diocletus]

As we both know they didn't just spray luminol there, they did TMB tsts which were negative. However on May 23rd the records showing the negative TMB had not yet been released so when Stefanoni says this she does so having successfully hidden the TMB negatives which would show she was lying.

Yup. That's a lie. She's a liar.

 

[Kaosium]

Who is this girl Kelsey Kay, and what is her agenda?

'Hell hath no fury....'

 

[Grinder]

"Sanction" seems to fall into the same category. As far as auto-antonyms, how about "Yugo" and "car?"

That's more of an oxymoron.