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

[Kaosium]

I think the towels played a bigger part and it's easy to forget about them because ILE let them rot. Rudy had blood all over at least one hand, the natural thing for him to grab first after flipping the switch is a towel. From there he can wipe off the easily transferable blood and turn on the tap or whatever he did next. The towels ended up in the murder room but they started in the bathroom and it would figure he'd also employ them there as needed before he takes them into the murder room.

 

[anglolawyer]

I think the towels played a bigger part and it's easy to forget about them because ILE let them rot. Rudy had blood all over at least one hand, the natural thing for him to grab first after flipping the switch is a towel. From there he can wipe off the easily transferable blood and turn on the tap or whatever he did next. The towels ended up in the murder room but they started in the bathroom and it would figure he'd also employ them there as needed before he takes them into the murder room.

But the sequence is murder, mop up distressing blood (with towels), strip victim, jerk off, clean up in bathroom. I think.

 

[acbytesla]

These are the kind of discussions that drive me crazy. With all due respect, I see it as mental masturbation without the happy ending.

There is no way we will ever know precisely what happened and everyone is basing their speculation on how the murder went down based on the scantiest clues.

I see the evidence that Rudy committed the murder based on his footprints, palm print, DNA and his statements. What I don't see is similar incriminating evidence that Amanda and Raffaele were involved.

I also don't see every detail on how the murder went down.

Somehow, this just isn't that satisfying to me.

 

[Diocletus]

What I don't see is similar incriminating evidence that Amanda and Raffaele were involved.

Ah ha! So you admit there was a cleanup.

 

[Charlie Wilkes]

Not at all. It's just that I have a detailed narative that explains the bathmat print preciesly and ties together other factors. If you can counter that narative with one that involves the sink, bidet or toilet then we'll have something to work with. But remember when creating the narative to account for cleaning the valve that will be operated with a blood soaked hand. That cleanup will spread bloody water on the back of the fixture and possibly the floor which also needs to be cleaned up and after all this cleaning you get a few drips of diluted blood on all of these fixtures.

I don't think the facts allow for such a precise reconstruction. Something along the lines of what you describe took place in the bathroom. The bidet had blood in the drain and splashes of diluted blood on in the basin and on the rim. That suggests to me that he used it rather than the shower to rinse off his leg, after removing his shoe just as you say. He could have wiped his hands with a towel before he did any of this.

That is what I think is most likely, but I can't say the evidence proves my theory or disproves yours.

 

[acbytesla]

Ah ha! So you admit there was a cleanup.

ah ha...no I don't. I don't see evidence of that either. Maybe by some of those that are satisfied...but not me.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the DNA report itself is only the tip of the iceberg

Two DNA experts wrote, "An effective DNA discovery request needs to be highly specific and void of boiler plate ‘fluff’ that merely creates busy work for the laboratory. Essential components of a DNA discovery request include: laboratory bench notes, CV and proficiency test results for analysts, QC reports (e.g. contamination instances, corrective actions, and unexpected results), raw electronic STR DNA data, protocols for all analyses, interpretation guidelines, the Quality Assurance Manual, and complete chain of custody information.

Whether or not you have a DNA expert on your case, simply obtaining the final DNA report is not sufficient due diligence. Further discovery is essential to understanding the full impact of the DNA testing on your case. Unfortunately, both prosecutors and defense attorneys do not always realize this." (highlighting mine)
The reason I am posting this is that there seems to be some question of the utility of the electronic data even at this late date.

 

[kwill]

Two DNA experts wrote, "An effective DNA discovery request needs to be highly specific and void of boiler plate ‘fluff’ that merely creates busy work for the laboratory. Essential components of a DNA discovery request include: laboratory bench notes, CV and proficiency test results for analysts, QC reports (e.g. contamination instances, corrective actions, and unexpected results), raw electronic STR DNA data, protocols for all analyses, interpretation guidelines, the Quality Assurance Manual, and complete chain of custody information.
Whether or not you have a DNA expert on your case, simply obtaining the final DNA report is not sufficient due diligence. Further discovery is essential to understanding the full impact of the DNA testing on your case. Unfortunately, both prosecutors and defense attorneys do not always realize this." (highlighting mine)
The reason I am posting this is that there seems to be some question of the utility of the electronic data even at this late date.

It's astonishing. And I highlighted the chain of custody item because in the case of the bra clasp, it ain't there. There is no chain of custody. To use an item that was left behind for six weeks and then found in a different place as the sole piece of physical evidence against a suspect in a brutal murder is just -- c.r.a.z.y.

 

[Kaosium]

Two DNA experts wrote, "An effective DNA discovery request needs to be highly specific and void of boiler plate ‘fluff’ that merely creates busy work for the laboratory. Essential components of a DNA discovery request include: laboratory bench notes, CV and proficiency test results for analysts, QC reports (e.g. contamination instances, corrective actions, and unexpected results), raw electronic STR DNA data, protocols for all analyses, interpretation guidelines, the Quality Assurance Manual, and complete chain of custody information.

Whether or not you have a DNA expert on your case, simply obtaining the final DNA report is not sufficient due diligence. Further discovery is essential to understanding the full impact of the DNA testing on your case. Unfortunately, both prosecutors and defense attorneys do not always realize this." (highlighting mine)
The reason I am posting this is that there seems to be some question of the utility of the electronic data even at this late date.

I saw something about that...elsewhere...a bunny cornered a boffin and made him squeal! It caused me to think of this:

'..and myopic boffins now misled,
shall hold themselves ashamed it was not clear,
and clutch their sheepskins near,
Whiles any speaks,
who sought with us
upon St. Amanda's Day!'



(with all due apologies!)

 

[codyjuneau]

Jumbled laundry

.
Another view of the laundry drying rack. Click on the thumbnail to get a higher resolution view, then zoom in. Charlies November zip file has a much higher resolution photo. It is dsc_0094.jpg.

Is that a normal way to dry laundry? Everything looks just sort of stuffed on top. Someone in a hurry?

Besides that, for laundered items drying, the socks look kind of reddish in spots. Were they ever tested?


.

 

[Grinder]

Is that a normal way to dry laundry? Everything looks just sort of stuffed on top. Someone in a hurry?

Always wondered if Meredith's bra could have fallen off and Raf just picked it up off the ground. That is the big problem with LCN DNA, it can get on so easily.

 

[codyjuneau]

BTW

.
By the way, regarding the photo I posted yesterday of the leaf on the window ledge. There are actually two leaves there, one mostly on top of the other.
.

 

[Diocletus]

.
Another view of the laundry drying rack. Click on the thumbnail to get a higher resolution view, then zoom in. Charlies November zip file has a much higher resolution photo. It is dsc_0094.jpg.

Is that a normal way to dry laundry? Everything looks just sort of stuffed on top. Someone in a hurry?

Besides that, for laundered items drying, the socks look kind of reddish in spots. Were they ever tested?

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_5276152e305be8d539.jpg[/qimg]
.

Nope. Not tested.

 

[Diocletus]

Always wondered if Meredith's bra could have fallen off and Raf just picked it up off the ground. That is the big problem with LCN DNA, it can get on so easily.

That's funny. I've been wondering if Raf and 5 other guys picked up the bra.

 

[RandyN]

I tend to agree, mostly because of the trace of blood in the bidet and the fact that the print is where you'd expect to find it if he'd washed his foot in the bidet and then stepped onto the mat. Using the shower just seems a bit too involved somehow for someone who was trying to clean up quickly; presumably he was only trying to wash a particular spot on his jeans or to wash his foot rather than take a shower...

Of course, there's nothing to actually rule it out, either - we'd just need to say he did it without leaving traces or washed them away - it's just that the traces he did leave seem explained well enough by him using the bidet instead.

(P.S. Welcome back Anglo, glad you're not sulking any more).

He was not sulking. He was making a point about unfair indiscriminate moderation.... a point with which I 110 % agree.

And look everything is perfect now. Good job my man...very good. BTW loved the Christmas Tree.

 

[JREF2010]

That's funny. I've been wondering if Raf and 5 other guys picked up the bra.

I always enjoy that perspective. Did the defense bring this up?

5 days away, I hope the Judges are familiar with all the DNA information and have read more than the Daily Mail about this case.

 

[RandyN]

.
I suppose you are correct, but I think it is easier said than done. The accusers just say we found DNA. A nice concise sound bite that the media is eager to report, the audience is eager to read, and the audience can understand.

How can defenders explain the reasons the result is not reliable in a way that is concise enough to be reported, read, and understood? I ask seriously, because it seems to be a common problem for defenders.
.

Well I think in this case if you take say 100 randomly picked DNA experts and present the knife sample scenario (size, single run, no test kit even manufactured in 2007, no machine certification to test at these levels, etc...) and without revealing the details of the case at all but rather just the methodology and sure go ahead and include the one off egram that Stefanoni created. And sure...present the confirmation of procedures by the prosecutor consultant Biondo but please don't forget to mention that Biondo is Stefanoni or lab tech X's boss.

Deny the 100 experts access to control data and electronic data files and set the time to the correct date of 2007 and provide all data about the equipment, SOP, and then ask how many are confident about the reliability of the conclusion of the tester. How good is this picture (egram) you hold in your hands?

Create a rating system from 1 to 5 with 5 meaning highly confident about the conclusion and 1 being no confidence at all about the conclusion and I am willing to bet that 99.99% of experts rate sample and test for 36 b to be 1. In fact they will moan that this result should be less than one because no matter what a lab in Rome interrupts...they are wrong. It is impossible for this lab to have any result even close to this that is safe and reliable and that adheres to world accepted standards of the science and in fact that evidence exists that indicates that this testing is the result of corruption if not simple investigative bias. (Stefanoni lied in court about the quantification of this sample, she refused to provide discovery pertaining to this sample, the prosecutor attempted twice to introduce incorrect or even false control documents about this sample), meanwhile Stefanoni had in her possession the reference samples of both defendants which is a complete breakdown of lab protocol and is something a real lab would not allow someone who is interrupting a test result to have... that is far less science than the average population is aware of... reading an egram is not science.

36 b is not MK DNA. The reason it is not is because no test or scientific procedure existed then nor can one be used today that can allow that conclusion. In fact the Italians including Novelli have irreversibly shown themselves to be not just fools but also foolish liars.

Someday someone will ask 100 real scientists for an opinion on this test and the conclusion of it and they will get to consider the suspicious extra details related to just these two samples. Along with the conflict of interest second opinion from Biondo and used by Massei (remember this is why Massei didn't need an independent DNA review) to convict two completely innocent persons. I have no doubt that the Italians will be found to be incompetent and corrupt.

Dave ...if you PM Randy from Calli he can hook you up with details of searching Franks site. I have to check because I had a contact that has the whole site saved in one file. She never posted here but I think I can still find her. Yes the way back is a pita.

 

[RandyN]

4 guys on the bra clasp....

I always enjoy that perspective. Did the defense bring this up?
5 days away, I hope the Judges are familiar with all the DNA information and have read more than the Daily Mail about this case.

Well the independant experts from the appeal trial sure made that point. IIRC the pathologist said she could even find the judge himself on there if she wanted to.

Has anyone heard either C or V mentioned in this trial?

 

[Wildhorses]

4 guys on the bra clasp....

Well the independant experts from the appeal trial sure made that point. IIRC the pathologist said she could even find the judge himself on there if she wanted to.

Has anyone heard either C or V mentioned in this trial?

Didn't the prosecutor insult them? I believe he did.

Can't remember what he called them. It wasn't she-devils: it was something else.

 

[e740JPH]

Hey! I calculated pi to 100 digits! Check it for yourself. How did I do it, you ask? I have a number of answers:

1 what does it matter? I got it right so my method must be valid.
2 I filed the calculation at court in October 2008
3 I divided 10 by 3 and sort of lopped a bit off and it came out right
4 I invited you to come see me make the calculation but you didn't show up.

Italian math, gotta love it! Thanks Anglo, welcome back!