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

[RandyN]

She's been convicted of murder. That's all the State Department will need to see. They'll send her back. If she wants to go the fugitive route, that's up to her.

That being said, I think we are in for another year or more of appeals and drama, and who knows what verdict at the end of it all.

That is not correct.

Knox can and certainly would appeal against a request for extradition and she must be heard. The State Department would never rubber stamp a case like this no matter what you wish for. Especially to Italy who has the worst record of human rights violations by its courts in the Western world. You can check that out yourself on the ECOHR web site. Italy...bad...corrupt...sneaky...liars.

By the time of an extradition request do you think no one will be calling for a closer look at the possible...no probable corrupt fraudlent case against two clearly innocent persons...one who is covered by the blanket of her own Constitution vs Italy... consummate violator of human rights within and by its own courts? Really?

You can do better than this.

 

[Poppy1016]

Machiavelli, you know a lot about many things. I mean that truthfully; there is no second meaning to my comment. Are you trained in law, or history, or philosophy? Are you a professor?

Why do you go out of your way to kiss Mach's butt?

 

[GWCarver]

Now that the trial is over Mach, perhaps you can reveal your true identity.

Make that "identities". There is no way this is the same Machiavelli I argued with over at IIP a couple years ago, unless there was an intervention and his Adderall script was taken away from him.

 

[Bob001]

I don't understand what happened today, or who acted. Who reaffirmed the guilty verdict? On what basis? What happens now? Her lawyers apparently are planning an appeal. To whom? When does this end? Observers seem pretty confident that American authorities would reject an Italian demand for extradition, but what happens if Amanda travels outside the U.S. while the conviction is standing? How long can this drag on?

This New York Times story is confusing. Did the Supreme Court send the acquittal by the Perugia appeals court to the Florence appeals court? Why not back to Perugia? (The story also seems more pro-prosecution than warranted, like stating as a fact that the prosecution has DNA and eyewitness testimony without noting that they are challenged, at the very least. Who is this reporter Elisabetta Povoledo, and does she have a history with the case?)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/31/world/europe/amanda-knox-trial-in-italy.html?hpw&rref=world

Editing to add link to Wall Street Journal story, which seems more even-handed. But I still don't understand how the case was moved to Florence. Is that like a change of venue, or what?
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303973704579353071903182530?mod=trending_now_3

 

[GWCarver]

That is not correct.

Knox can and certainly would appeal against a request for extradition and she must be heard. The State Department would never rubber stamp a case like this no matter what you wish for. Especially to Italy who has the worst record of human rights violations by its courts in the Western world. You can check that out yourself on the ECOHR web site. Italy...bad...corrupt...sneaky...liars.

By the time of an extradition request do you think no one will be calling for a closer look at the possible...no probable corrupt fraudlent case against two clearly innocent persons...one who is covered by the blanket of her own Constitution vs Italy... consummate violator of human rights within and by its own courts? Really?

Please try harder.

I recall Mignini himself saying there was no way they would ever get Amanda back to Italy. Of course, I'll concede Miginini is wrong about so many things he could be wrong about this, too.

 

[Poppy1016]

I expected anger from people convinced that a grave injustice was done today... so I didn't really expect this reaction.

It's hard to "read" the passions underlying a post, but I'd say this was written from anger. I could be wrong.

Still, it's amazing what supporters of guilt always avoid addressing... but no matter. This now is far greater than winning a clever debate on some skeptics thread somewhere.

Two innocent lives are in the balance. This is the hallmark of a wrongful conviction which transcends any one particular country or system.

At base, a just system does not convict with invented facts. And here if Nencini listens to Crini... is it Meredith going in a rage because Rudy didn't flush a toilet? I mean forget Amanda, that one doesn't even match Meredith's personality. That was Crini's theory which (seemingly) carried the day today.

Is it a sex game gone wrong? The ISC seems to think so, and we're waiting 90 days to see if Nencini agrees with the stipulations of the ISC, or agrees with Crini's "out of the blue" theory....

Or whether Nencini goes back to Massei's "no motive", just a "choice for evil," or for heavens sake, will we in 90 days be arguing about Satanic rites again, because Nencini bypassed "Hallowe'en, day of the dead rites induced killing," to resurrect Good ol' Lucifer himself?

Or worse.

Will Nencini write about a hereto unknown "theory" of how this happened? If Nencini writes a completely new "theory" as to his reason for convicting, how can one say that the defence could have been aware of what they were defending their clients against?

Sort of like Massei? Did the defence even know about Massei's "choice for evil" theory, so as to be able to make full and informed answer?

I guess we'll now be schooled in why it is not necessary for a defendant to be informed of the theory against them - they can read about it in jail when the motivations comes out... a little late to mount a defence.

It looks like the ISC gets to wave away with the flick of a wrist the right to a fair trial in Italy. At some point one can argue law all they want.... but if the citizenry catch on that the system is unfair this way.... well, you get my drift.

I think a storm of enormous proportions will begin as a result of this insane verdict. Italy may have won the battle, but just ask Japan who won the war. Buckle your seatbelts Italy, you may have awakened the sleeping giant.

 

[Kaosium]

Because there has recently been some confusion about this point, I would like to return to the subject of raw versus processed data in STR DNA forensics. DNA forensic electropherograms are often presented as a stack of four plots in four colors. That is because four different wavelengths of light are being monitored. The wavelength of the light used for excitation is 488 nm (provided by a laser), but four different fluorescent dyes are used (they can be covalently attached to the 5’-ends of the primers used for PCR). The dyes have different wavelengths of maximum emission, but their spectra overlap, and the information must be deconvoluted. The process of deconvoluting a single spectrum into four channels uses virtual filters. If this process is not done properly, an artifact known as pull-up (basically peaks in the wrong channel) will occur. The emission spectrum prior to deconvolution is considered raw data.

Butler and colleagues wrote, “The output from the data collection program is 'raw data' that comes in the form of relative fluorescence units on the y-axis and number of data points collected on the x-axis. The GeneScan and Genotyper programs are necessary to convert the raw data into the appropriately colored peak and to generate STR genotyping information…GeneScan software [55] also performs three primary functions. It calls peaks based on threshold values specified by the user; it separates the peaks into the appropriate dye color based on a matrix file; and it sizes the STR allele peaks based on an internal size standard labeled with a different colored dye that is run in every sample…The manufacturer of a particular STR kit normally provides Genotyper macros in order to make the allele calls from the allelic ladders. These macros can be designed to filter out stutter peaks (see [59]) that may interfere with sample interpretation.”

I will have to get back to you with respect to cycle numbers, but suffice it to say that it obviously should be discoverable. It might be part of the machine logs. With respect to the electronic data files, Dr. Jason Gilder responded to a question of mine: "Each tested sample has its own file. The file contains the full electropherogram trace information along with other information about the testing conditions (e.g., date, time, injection time, voltage, temperature, current, the RFU threshold used by the analyst). If you have the electronic data, you can use the DNA analysis software (GeneScan & Genotyper or GeneMapper ID) to independently analyze the electronic data. That allows you to examine the results as closely as possible (zoom in on the electropherogram to evaluate low-level results) and establish the RFU threshold of your choosing."ETA
The appendix to this article has a model discovery form. It does not discuss the PCR amplification phase of the experiment specifically, but it does have a point (6) that reads, "Data files: Please provide copies of all data files used and created in the course of performing the testing and analyzing the data in this case. These files should include all data necessary to, (i) independently reana- lyze the raw data and (ii) reconstruct the analysis per- formed in this case. For analyses performed with GeneScan and Genotyper, these materials should include..."

The Court of Supreme Cassation did a thorough job of treading science into the ground in their motivations report. Unless someone wakes up, Italy will continue to produce false convictions based on forensics that was buttressed by courtroom lies and continual stonewalling of reasonable requests from the defense.

In part 2 (p. 648) of his three-part textbook Advanced Topics in Forensic DNA Typing: Methodology, John Butler wrote in response to the question, "Is it a problem to share electronic data files with the defense? We see no problem providing electronic data files to the defense since any changes to the inherent data would be detectable by the crime lab forensic scientist. We have seen instances of some defense experts manipulating the appearance of the data by changing various parameters. However, with the aid of a forensic scientist, a prosecutor will be able to immediately recognize what was done and cross-examine the witness regarding the motive for the changes." Of course, if a defense expert can change the appearance of data by the choice of parameters, then so can the forensic lab where the work was originally done.

On page 538 of the same textbook as I previously cited, John M. Butler quotes Dr. Robin Cotton (an associate professor at Boston University): “I think that the most important question for a lab (in fact, any discipline in the lab), is if you were to hand this information—the information you are going to give over to the defense—to a respected colleague, would you have given them everything they need to evaluate your work? If the answer is “yes”, then that’s about what you should be giving on discovery.”

DNA is a polymer of deoxynucleotides, each of which consists of a base, deoxyribose (a derivative of a sugar), and phosphate (the conjugate base of phosphoric acid). There is no protein, which is a polymer of amino acids. And your definition of allele is wrong; therefore, your discussion of the alleles does not make sense in at least two ways.

With respect to the YSTR profile (from the Y-chromosome) of the clasp, there are a minimum of two male contributors to the clasp besides Raffaele. If one uses threshold values for peaks similar to that used for the knife, then one sees about four other male contributors. Now one can wish these peaks away by saying that they are from the environment, but in reality that is just another way of saying that the bra clasp is contaminated. Thank you for acknowledging this. It is the number of contributors that is important, not the identities of the contributors.

I just wanted to make sure these excellent posts were available in one spot and didn't get lost in the shuffle. I couldn't help but wonder if the lines I found interesting might have something to do with just why there has been an absolute refusal to hand over the EDFs, even defying an order from a judge...

 

[lionking]

I think a storm of enormous proportions will begin as a result of this insane verdict. Italy may have won the battle, but just ask Japan who won the war. Buckle your seatbelts Italy, you may have awakened the sleeping giant.

Yeah? So what's going to happen?

In the scheme of things, this case is inconsequential.

 

[Kaosium]

I don't understand what happened today, or who acted. Who reaffirmed the guilty verdict? On what basis?

A court in Florence acting as the new appeal court, as the Supreme Court of Italy quashed the Hellmann appeal verdict last March.

What happens now? Her lawyers apparently are planning an appeal. To whom?

The defense appeals to the Supreme Court, just like the prosecution did last time. They could quash this verdict as well.

When does this end?

An appeals verdict being accepted by the Supreme Court.

Observers seem pretty confident that American authorities would reject an Italian demand for extradition, but what happens if Amanda travels outside the U.S. while the conviction is standing?

She could be extradited to Italy if they ask and the other country agrees. However like Panama recently refusing to extradite an American convicted in absentia by an Italian court, they may not do so.

How long can this drag on?

Theoretically forever, though there's some time limit imposed, however I'm not familiar with what that is or when it might kick in.

After all appeals are exhausted Amanda can take her case to the ECHR, just as she's already petitioned them regarding the calunnia conviction as that was confirmed by the Supreme Court when they quashed the acquittal.

Then they can either drop it, or force another trial having taken the ECHR ruling into account.

Yay!

This New York Times story is confusing. Did the Supreme Court send the acquittal by the Perugia appeals court to the Florence appeals court?

Yes.

Why not back to Perugia?

The defense had requested a change of venue.

(The story also seems more pro-prosecution than warranted, like stating as a fact that the prosecution has DNA and eyewitness testimony without noting that they are challenged, at the very least. Who is this reporter Elisabetta Povoledo, and does she have a history with the case?)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/31/opinion/we-are-giving-ourselves-cancer.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0

I've not heard of her and I can't find what you're referring to in that link.

 

[Bill Williams]

Yeah? So what's going to happen?

In the scheme of things, this case is inconsequential.

That's yet to be seen. In Canada there have been cases of wrongful conviction, like the Steven Truscott case in the 1950s, that became so notorious that they redefined Canadian law. For example, the Truscott case led almost directly to Canada abolishing capital punishment.

The Susan Nellis case led to calling out rotten police who substituted hunches for evidence.

The tasering-death at Vancouver airport of a Polish immigrant led to a complete overhaul of police taser use.

The list goes on. Sadly, the Wrongful Conviction of Sollecito and Knox bears the classic hallmarks of some of the more famous Canadian ones. I'll dig out the study if you want from 2006.

In the scheme of things, backlash from ordinary people leads to things like the State Department refusing to extradite.

Hell, judging from today's news reports, and the reversal of comments from readers when compared to 2007 and 2008, I'd say this thing is well on its way to creating the kind of groundswell that can do real damage to Italy. Maybe not a lot, but Italy does not need bad PR right now.

Wrongful Convictions are all too common and carry a price.

 

[Kaosium]

Yeah? So what's going to happen?

In the scheme of things, this case is inconsequential.

So was Lindy Chamberlain's, most of these are when they start.

This may become the most notorious miscarriage of justice in recent history.

It really is ridiculous and cruel to convict three people for the crime of one just so Italy doesn't have to man up and admit to the mistake.

 

[anglolawyer]

Yeah, unlike the Knox CTers, the courts probably didn't spend tens of thousands of hours obsessing over the excruciating minutia of the case, like where the prosecutor went to school and what he ate for breakfast.



Of course today's verdict makes no difference. JFK nutters, 9/11 nutters, Pan-Am 103 nutters, Moon landing nutters, etc all still believe they are right. No amount of evidence will ever convince them otherwise.

I have had this conversation before and it led to infractions. There is a breed of 'skeptic' here who thinks 'conspiracy' is a magic word which somehow puts an end to all argument. Brand something a conspiracy theory and then move onto the Next Great Skeptical Triumph, most likely consisting of debunking a Bigfoot sighting or alien abduction.

In fact, the prosecution case is a conspiracy theory. The pro-innocence crime theory does not involve a conspiracy at all, just a single actor. So if the CTers are the nutters then this week's collection of judicial impostors are in that group, not us.

I challenge you to write one post on this thread saying why you think they are guilty that refers not blindly to authority but to the facts. Not holding my breath, skeptic.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

This thing is still a long way from being over and that in itself is really a shame, over six years so far and possibly many years yet to go.

 

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

An African-American man I know made the following observation:

The Amanda Knox case marks the only time in history white police officers caught a drug-dealing, working-class, low-life black man with a criminal record and charged him with committing rape, robbery and murder...before deciding "Nah. He did it?! Come on now. Not buying it. Let's railroad two middle-class, educated and attractive young white people for what he did and let him off easy!"

Usually when you hear a story of a grave miscarriage of justice and de facto public lynching, the races are reversed in the above scenario.

 

[anglolawyer]

Now that the trial is over Mach, perhaps you can reveal your true identity.

Oh and his crime theory including the time line. Previously, it was 'too soon' to do that. That excuse has presumably fallen away now the Italian part of the case is over (forget about the ISC doing anything).

Actually, don't bother Mach. It can't be done, as Nencini's motivation will demonstrate. It's not interesting anymore. The case is about the lies and corruption that brought this tragedy about. That will be my focus now.

 

[RandyN]

Yeah? So what's going to happen?

In the scheme of things, this case is inconsequential.

I agree... this is likely correct.

Only the victims family and the wrongly accused and their family are directly affected.

In fact I wonder how the Italians will feel when they finally put their boy into jail meanwhile Knox will never be extradited to Italy. Never! Italy can come here and present the case during an appeal hearing against extradition. Im pretty confident that no court would extradite once the case or rather lack of a case is presented.

Not sure any of this can even happen until after the ECOHR hears the inevitable appeals against Italy in the matter.

But sure...they can lock up the home boy and then get back to loving them 11 year old babes...gulp.

 

[Bob001]

An African-American man I know made the following observation:

The Amanda Knox case marks the only time in history white police officers caught a drug-dealing, working-class, low-life black man with a criminal record and charged him with committing rape, robbery and murder...before deciding "Nah. He did it?! Come on now. Not buying it. Let's railroad two middle-class, educated and attractive young white people for what he did and let him off easy!"

Usually when you hear a story of a grave miscarriage of justice and de facto public lynching, the races are reversed in the above scenario.

Italy doesn't have anything like America's racial history. Maybe working-class street cops were more resentful of two spoiled rich kids (as they perceived them), one of whom was a spacey American, than they were of a common thug. And the cops didn't decide that Guede didn't do it, just that he did it with the "rich kids'" help.

 

[Bob001]

....
I've not heard of her and I can't find what you're referring to in that link.

It looks like I posted the wrong link (I had a couple stories on the screen). I'll try to correct my post.

I meant this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/31/world/europe/amanda-knox-trial-in-italy.html?hpw&rref=world

It also looks like the story's been edited and made more even-handed since I read it earlier. It no longer mentions DNA at all.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What a witch hunt. Remind me not to ever go back to Italy.

 

[e740JPH]

I wonder why the jury took 12 hours or so to reach the pre-ordained veredict. What were they discussing?

They were busy eating half-cooked pizza ...