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

[toto]

Corriere Nov 7
The title: "She was with Patrick and screamed"

http://www.corriere.it/cronache/07_novembre_07/meredith_verbali_sarzanini.shtml

The Skype call from Guede to Giacomo on Nov 11, four days later is the one when he refers to an Italian guy, in answer to the question "So was it Raffaele, the one on tv?" by replying "I think so. But I am not sure." And the call in which he earlier says "Amanda has nothing to do with it".

 

[davefoc]

Any other DNA found on the clasp is irrelevant as it wasn't sourced to a suspect.

???

The DNA on the clasp is alleged to be evidence that Sollecito was in the room at the time of the murder. Do you think there were three other men in the room at the time of the murder besides Sollecito and Guede?

Do you have some thoughts on why Sollecito DNA got on the clasp, but no where else in the room where Kercher was murdered? Do you have some thoughts how Sollecito participated in this murder without leaving shoe prints in the blood on the floor?

Another explanation for the other DNA on the clasp was that the clasp was contaminated from a source that had the DNA of several different males on it.

One way to attempt to sort this out would be to retest the sample. Do you know why that wasn't done?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

almost an axiom of DNA profiling

Any other DNA found on the clasp is irrelevant as it wasn't sourced to a suspect.

I have examined the YSTR egrams myself. There are several male contributors besides Rafffaele, as Conti and Vecchiotti noted. If there DNA came to be on the clasp in a way that is unrelated to the crime, then there is no way to differentiate that DNA from Raffaele's DNA. In other words, there is nothing to say that Raffaele's DNA might also have been transferred to the clasp innocently. DNA cannot be interrogated to determine the time or manner of its deposition.

 

[HotNostril]

No. It is very relevant as it means you have to consider the possibility of contamination. It is just common sense.

I need not consider any such thing.

Find me a source where it states in order for DNA evidence to be relevant every speck of DNA present at a crime scene must be accounted for and if not, labeled as contamination and tossed out of evidence.

 

[souldonut]

It's not that I have blind faith in police.

How does your faith in the police (at least in this case) handle that four key computer hard drives were destroyed in police custody? Do you believe this was an honest mistake by generally good intentioned police, professionally carrying out their duty to uncover the truth? Why didn't they just mirror the hard drives? Or why, after destroying the first drive, didn't they step back and question what they were doing?

Given how much focused effort it takes to destroy a computer hard drive circuitry (nearly impossible with normal use, and arguably impossible in the hands of anyone competent with computers), it's clear that the police were up to no good, and were seeking to get rid of potentially exculpatory evidence. This is especially apparent, after defense low level data recovery consultants found RS' computer was used to play the cartoon Naruto at 9:26 pm, near the most likely TOD. (!!!!!) Good thing the defense did not have "blind faith" in the cops elite data-recovery-team (lol), and decided to hire consultants to examine the (fortunately) intact recording surfaces.

-sd

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Lady Windermere rides again

Can you quantify "a language she barely knew" for me please.

And remind me again what time the interpreter arrived & brought her a cappuccino?

Strictly speaking, there was no interpreter, just another member of the interrogation team. She had to drive for an hour just to get there. I will leave you to determine for yourself why that is significant. I think it was actually Earl Grey tea, by the way, along with some cranberry scones.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Leiterman case

I need not consider any such thing.

Find me a source where it states in order for DNA evidence to be relevant every speck of DNA present at a crime science must be accounted for and if not, labeled as contamination and tossed out of evidence.

That is a blatant misrepresentation of the serious argument that you have been offered. I suggest you read up on the Leiterman, Leskie, Anderson, Jama, and Gesah cases before commenting again.

 

[Grinder]

Personal attacks?

This is a skeptics forum. It's not an "everyone has the right to an opinion" forum.

But it is true, you are under no obligation to explain yourself or the opinions you hold.

One opinion you hold is that your view of stomach content analysis, while possible, puts that opinion at the extreme end of a Bell curve of probability. You need something more than, "well, I just believe they are guilty," to justify that belief.

It's always strange when someone describes this kind of response to statistically improbable beliefs, "a personal attack."

Sheesh.

I would swear that you used to make the exact opposite point on rights to opinions.

OT - Tesla, how's Bertha?

 

[HotNostril]

I have examined the YSTR egrams myself. There are several male contributors besides Rafffaele, as Conti and Vecchiotti noted. If there DNA came to be on the clasp in a way that is unrelated to the crime, then there is no way to differentiate that DNA from Raffaele's DNA. In other words, there is nothing to say that Raffaele's DNA might also have been transferred to the clasp innocently. DNA cannot be interrogated to determine the time or manner of its deposition.

Agreed.

If you want me to ignore his DNA give me a reasonable alternative explain action for how it got there.

According to what I've read here, there is no other evidence of him anywhere at all. Except on a cigarette butt collected much earlier.
Are you now trying to convince me that his DNA was indeed elsewhere in the murder room and transferred to the clasp?
Are you trying to convince me it was a frame job?

 

[Dan O.]

That the murderer was black.

The police wrote that in the statement they typed in Italian legalese. The question was what did Amanda say. Unfortunately, the tapes from that night have gone missing. But we do have a partial accounting in Amanda's writings the morning afterwards. No mention of any black there.

Amanda mentions Patrick in her MySpace blog. But she doesn't call him a "Black Boy". (Is that what the police actually wrote or is that another translation error?)

Speaking of working, I've been working everynight (except for monday night) from 10pm to 230am at a bar called Le Chic. Its a really small place owned by this man from the congo. his name is patrick. my other fellow employee is a guy from algeria who is a crazy good dancer and yet still really likes dancing with me. havent quite figured that one out.

 

[Kestrel]

I don't know why anyone makes anything of the 3am phone call? Are people suggesting that she only called because she was feeling scared and upset about being involved in a violent murder? If Amanda was up all night following being involved in the murder, why didn't she call home at an earlier time when she knew they would be up?

Amanda called her mother at 12:47 pm, this would be 3:47 am in Seattle if my calculations are correct. During the first trial, the prosecution falsely claimed that this was before anything had happened. It was in fact after Amanda had visited the cottage, discovered the door open, seen the blood in the bathroom, the broken window in Filomena's room, tried to call both of Meredith's phones and discussed these things with Filomena over the phone. Filomena was already heading back to the cottage.

Her mother told Amanda to call the police.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

daylight savings versus standard time

The call was made at 4:47 Seattle time. There was a difference in the dates that the two cities changed from daylight savings to standard time.

 

[RoseMontague]

I need not consider any such thing.

Find me a source where it states in order for DNA evidence to be relevant every speck of DNA present at a crime science must be accounted for and if not, labeled as contamination and tossed out of evidence.

According to the RIS and C&V, for that DNA to be relevant as evidence it has to be tested at least twice. You can look up the cites yourself. Your strawman argument above is just that, a stawman. These additional profiles showed up in the same test. If you are going to go against scientific protocol and consider that evidence as relevant, then yes the entire result of the test needs to be considered. I made no claim as to test results on every speck of DNA at a crime scene.

 

[HotNostril]

Strictly speaking, there was no interpreter, just another member of the interrogation team. She had to drive for an hour just to get there. I will leave you to determine for yourself why that is significant. I think it was actually Earl Grey tea, by the way, along with some cranberry scones.

Oooh my mistake ... Cranberry scones and tea...that does sound like torture...

 

[kwill]

If you want me to ignore his DNA give me a reasonable alternative explain action for how it got there.

Sorry, but that's backwards. If you want to count it give me a reasonable explanation for how that of 3 other guys got there. And while you're at it, show me how it got moved from one part of the murder room to another part.

Who touched it? When? What had they been touching before that? Did only one person touch it or were there several? Did they touch it with their hands or with some other object or did they kick it?

The clasp is not evidence if these questions can't be answered. Or at least in the USA it would not be evidence.

 

[Grinder]

That the murderer was black.

So Rudy is the murderer! Anyway, you still haven't explained what the police knew to be correct BEFORE Amanda made her statement.

They found one or two (that's for you Anglo) text messages between Amanda and PL and figured out that she had gone and met PL just about the time of the murder. Therefore, they knew he was involved and when she buckled after being told they KNEW PL had been there and she had involvement. The bilingual interrogator admitted in court that she while acting as if only a translator helped the rest of the interrogators by telling Amanda that she had had a repressed memory after an accident and that Amanda too could remember if she tried hard enough.

I wished the PGP would drop the "accusation" and the "super" witnesses and try to make a case that fits the known times and hard circumstantial evidence.

 

[HotNostril]

According to the RIS and C&V, for that DNA to be relevant as evidence it has to be tested at least twice. You can look up the cites yourself. Your strawman argument above is just that, a stawman. These additional profiles showed up in the same test. If you are going to go against scientific protocol and consider that evidence as relevant, then yes the entire result of the test needs to be considered. I made no claim as to test results on every speck of DNA at a crime scene.

It's a shame murderers don't always adhere to scientific standards and scientists don't investigate crimes and they don't occur in laboratories.

 

[Bill Williams]

Agreed.

If you want me to ignore his DNA give me a reasonable alternative explain action for how it got there.
According to what I've read here, there is no other evidence of him anywhere at all. Except on a cigarette butt collected much earlier.
Are you now trying to convince me that his DNA was indeed elsewhere in the murder room and transferred to the clasp?
Are you trying to convince me it was a frame job?

At the 2009 trial, the the person who collected the clasp was on the stand. The clasp had lain on the floor for 46 days before she returned to get it. It was in a different plcae on the floor than 46 days previous.

They played for the woman the video her Scientific Police team made of the collection. It shows her picking up the bra-clasp with an obviously dirty forensic glove. She turns it over hand to hand. Unfortunately the part where she potentially handles the hooks themselves is obscured in the video.

So under cross examination she's asked, "Did you touch the hooks?" She could neither confirm nor deny she'd touched them.

 

[NancyS]

Agreed.

If you want me to ignore his DNA give me a reasonable alternative explain action for how it got there.

According to what I've read here, there is no other evidence of him anywhere at all. Except on a cigarette butt collected much earlier.
Are you now trying to convince me that his DNA was indeed elsewhere in the murder room and transferred to the clasp?
Are you trying to convince me it was a frame job?

Raffaele had spent time with Meredith that day, before she got dressed - this gives you any number of possible ways to transfer DNA to her clothing, to her body, to her bra-clasp. After leaving Raffaele and Amanda the first thing she picked up could have been her bra

If you spent time with a someone, do you thing it would be impossible to pick up a trace of their DNA?

 

[Dan O.]

Amanda called her mother at 12:47 pm, this would be 3:47 am in Seattle if my calculations are correct.

Your calculations are not correct. Daylight savings time changes on a different day in the US than in Europe. I posted this back in 2010:

The actual time of the first phone call from Amanda to her mother was 12:47:43 on Nov. 2nd, 2007 CET. Click this link (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclo...1&day=2&year=2007&hour=12&min=47&sec=43&p1=48) to see what time it was in other places around the world.