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

[Grinder]

As for diseases, Lalli looked for and didn't find any but more to the point had she diabetes, Crohn's disease or some GI malady that would have been in her medical records and easy to prove in court and put an end to this.

A fair amount of people have undiagnosed type 2 diabetes although likely less on an issue in the UK with government health care.

The literature discusses diabetes as a major contributor to slow digestive functioning. It could be a temporary malady as I have mentioned. Someone mention the girls' saying that Meredith wasn't feeling well, maybe it was more than a headache.

After doing the research I'm more convinced than ever that something is amiss on this issue. Later than 6:30 start of meal, chyme that slipped down or some malady that was missed.

I could go back for one of the alcohol discussions but Chris can voice his exact feelings about the work if he chooses. most recently he only said he would feel better about it if other tests had been performed.

Those tests are not esoteric yet Lalli didn't do them. The one sample was explained away because a container was alleged to have contained alcohol before being used IIRC while other evidence was stored improperly. The ILE did a second test that confirmed the one or two drinks (.43 ) Lalli also found. Does Chris agree? I don't know but he didn't used to.

I find it interesting that it so much more likely statistically both for the science and Italian police work that a mistake or mistakes were made yet the resistance here is immense.

The most recent vaunted studies show that Meredith not starting within an hour is highly unlikely and two hours nearly impossible yet the analysis here is that means she must have been killed immediately on return.

Without checking, one of the studies indicated that once 3 hours was reached 4 was almost as likely or was more... which would put a tail on the curve.

I'm sorry I wasn't here 3 or 4 years ago to help get this correct

Kaosium you still haven't provided a link to a study that demonstrates what the longest GE times are for healthy individuals.

You are now saying that since Lalli was incorrect with 2-3 hours that Introna had to alter his analysis because the court wouldn't believe the top forensic independent scientist. Is that correct?

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill

I always thought Rubin Carter was a symbol of racial injustice and this more than anything was the motivation behind his conviction. Of course his 1967 and 1976 trials could never happen in the present day America justice system with its built in checks and balances.

Nonetheless a remarkable man.

I am a tad tone deaf to that aspect of things. It's not like there is not racial injustice where I live, but the complex historic relationship between the law and slavery in the States makes this an issue that outsiders (me) perhaps should simply steer clear of.

So, Carter's wrongful conviction very well could have been top heavy with racial injustice. Two extraordinary individuals surface in this, though, one is co-wrongfully convicted John Artis. The way some people tell it, all Artis had to do to avoid jail himself was to rat out Carter. He wouldn't do that and spent 14 years in the jug before he was paroled. The other is Lesra Martin and the rest of the Canadians who (as shown in the film) did the grunt work to expose the nature of the wrongful conviction.

It is clear that Artis was a complete afterthought, that the New Jersey LE folk were out for Carter. Who does this remind you of? And like the Perugian follies, Artis and Carter were convicted not once, but twice; however their convictions were both full jury-trials.

So, it was probably a race-related prosecution, but the shenanigans in court were enough to sink them no matter what.

 

[Grinder]

RWVBWL

There was mushroom in the girls fridge, in a Tupperware tray. It's recorded in one of the crime scene videos. I wondered whether she might have taken a bite from one when passing through the kitchen. I was upbraided by Frank, no less, for musing on a guilter theory. I can't see why it is. But that aside, I don't know why we don't know whether it was mushroom, apple or something else.

Thanks for the info AngloLawyer!
Amazing that this isn't common knowledge amongst most who discuss this case in detail. That said, I wonder at what time she might have eaten part of a mushroom and how it could effect ToD discussion. And I wonder why there is not identifiable apple matter in her stomach, just veggies and cheese, it seems, from what I learned from reading what Grinder had quoted Doctor Lalli from?

Thanks Anglo I thought they found it but was too lazy to find a cite.

Eating of the mushroom is impossible because she must have been killed immediately on return because of the GE factors

Although I haven't done research on this mushroom timing thing, since it wasn't in digestive state it couldn't have been eaten more than a few minutes before death. Now we can't know if she ate just as she returned or some time later. Was there a bottle of wine in the refrigerator or somewhere else? Chris has pointed out that no alcohol was found in the stomach so that would mean if she drank that night and didn't drink at the girls' she would need a few minutes alive after the drink.

The mushroom is very interesting in that it seems to prove that she didn't walk into an immediate attack.

 

[JREF2010]

Nencini and his Taliban analogy

from the PGP wiki-
Judge Nencini said that "This is not a Taliban court, there is time for every request."

Luca Maori, also from Sollecito's defense team alluded to the sexual assault of Meredith and claimed there was a lack of evidence. He also mentioned a stain on Meredith's pillow that has never been tested: he believes this to be a semen stain. He has asked for new forensic tests to be performed on the pillow and also the rock used to break the window in Filomena Romanelli's bedroom.

Did Nencini allow the new evidence? No.

Why did Nencini discount the request for new evidence?

Is it truly a Taliban court as Nencini described himself?

 

[Bill Williams]

This is what is being done to Raffaele Sollecito. As one commentator observed, it is one thing for a country to wrongfully prosecute and convict a quirky foreigner, it is quite another to have one's own country turn on him like this.

http://pitchforksposts.com/2014/02/13/the-disfigured-face-of-bella-figura-raffaele-sollecitos-italy/

Intanto, non cambia nulla is an oft heard bitter expression of helplessness in the face of swindling or injustice, an expression of futility, perhaps even an excuse for not confronting or reporting the fiddlers, the liars and the abusive coercers: landlords who won’t update shock-giving irregular electrical wiring and who send bogus handymen who change hats according to the job to jerry-rig burst pipes, then still expect the rent after a month of continuing dripping and creeping mould....

 

[Bill Williams]

from the PGP wiki-
Judge Nencini said that "This is not a Taliban court, there is time for every request."

Luca Maori, also from Sollecito's defense team alluded to the sexual assault of Meredith and claimed there was a lack of evidence. He also mentioned a stain on Meredith's pillow that has never been tested: he believes this to be a semen stain. He has asked for new forensic tests to be performed on the pillow and also the rock used to break the window in Filomena Romanelli's bedroom.

Did Nencini allow the new evidence? No.

Why did Nencini discount the request for new evidence?

Is it truly a Taliban court as Nencini described himself?

For some strange reason, Edward McCall's fake-wiki at "THE"murderofmeredithkercher.com wishes to portray the events in Italy as normal and in the best light possible.

Best to eliminate the "THE" and go with the evidence-based wiki at murderofmeredithkercher.com.

For one thing, no one knows who Edward McCall is. Second of all, Edward McCall simply gets basic facts wrong. Like what JREF2010 quotes above.

Judge Nencini, despite not wanting to run a Taliban court, denied nearly all defence requests for reexamination of evidence. Instead, Nencini stayed with the playbook written by the March 2013 Cassazione reversal of the acquittals, and followed the the playbook which was, in turn, written for them by Galati back in Perugia.

And even then, the three things at trial Nencini actually chose to heard, all three went Knox/Sollecito's way. All three.

And Nencini convicted anyway? If all three of the items test at the new appeals trial went Sollecito's/Knox's way, what was there to convict them?

Everyone should read the Borsini motivations report, from Rudy Guede's fast track trial (meaning that there was no trial-hpase it it). In that non-trial-phase process, with no evidence submitted for testing, and being unrepresented, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were virtually convicted themselves. Yes, that's right, at the Borsini trial. (Who here has even ever heard of Borsini?)

So what's Nencini to do? Well, he does what he did in Jan 2014. Not rock the boat and kick the decision upstairs. But also Nencini is set to pronounce on issues about things NOT entered into his court. If Nencini goes with prosecutor Crini's brand new "factoid", that the kitchen knife is now a match for the bedsheet outline of another knife (in Meredith's blood), then.....

...... Nencini really IS a Taliban judge. That was not one of the 3 items entered into evidence at the Nencini trial, yet he's poised to find it as factual anyways.

May as well. It is proof that Knox/Sollecito are being wrongfully prosecuted - all the prosecutions have are pieces of evidence not tested at a trial.

 

[carlofab]

For some strange reason, Edward McCall's fake-wiki at "THE"murderofmeredithkercher.com wishes to portray the events in Italy as normal and in the best light possible.

Best to eliminate the "THE" and go with the evidence-based wiki at murderofmeredithkercher.com.

For one thing, no one knows who Edward McCall is. Second of all, Edward McCall simply gets basic facts wrong. Like what JREF2010 quotes above.

Judge Nencini, despite not wanting to run a Taliban court, denied nearly all defence requests for reexamination of evidence. Instead, Nencini stayed with the playbook written by the March 2013 Cassazione reversal of the acquittals, and followed the the playbook which was, in turn, written for them by Galati back in Perugia.

And even then, the three things at trial Nencini actually chose to heard, all three went Knox/Sollecito's way. All three.

And Nencini convicted anyway? If all three of the items test at the new appeals trial went Sollecito's/Knox's way, what was there to convict them?

Everyone should read the Borsini motivations report, from Rudy Guede's fast track trial (meaning that there was no trial-hpase it it). In that non-trial-phase process, with no evidence submitted for testing, and being unrepresented, Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were virtually convicted themselves. Yes, that's right, at the Borsini trial. (Who here has even ever heard of Borsini?)

So what's Nencini to do? Well, he does what he did in Jan 2014. Not rock the boat and kick the decision upstairs. But also Nencini is set to pronounce on issues about things NOT entered into his court. If Nencini goes with prosecutor Crini's brand new "factoid", that the kitchen knife is now a match for the bedsheet outline of another knife (in Meredith's blood), then.....

...... Nencini really IS a Taliban judge. That was not one of the 3 items entered into evidence at the Nencini trial, yet he's poised to find it as factual anyways.

May as well. It is proof that Knox/Sollecito are being wrongfully prosecuted - all the prosecutions have are pieces of evidence not tested at a trial.

My fear is that if this is indeed political none of the above matters. If it is political judges and prosecutors decide upon the verdict over lunch. The trial is merely a ceremony akin to an Easter Passion Play.

Nencini in this instance is left with the somewhat embarrassing task of conjuring up a motivations report. But perhaps like the Supreme Court he may simply resort to the ambiguous use of words like "osmosis" legitimately intended for another purpose. Misuse of such words is common in metaphysics at which the Italians excel.

 

[Desert Fox]

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/1JW3BpA.jpg[/qimg]

This image shows why I don't think there could have been multiple attackers in that room.

 

[Grinder]

Fast Track

Fast-track Trial

The giudizio abbreviato (fast-track trial, literally abbreviated or short proceeding) consists, basically, of proceedings where the trial phase is absent.

It is the Judge of the Preliminary Hearing who, according to the evidence gathered, during the preliminary investigations by the prosecutor and by the lawyer during the defensive investigations, if there were any, convicts or acquits the defendant.

Since this is a reduction of the defendant's rights (he basically gives up his right to presenting new evidence and to be tried by a Judge of the Trial), it must be he who asks that the Judge of the Preliminary Hearing hand down a judgment on him.

The defendant is rewarded with a reduction in sentence. The law states that this reduction is one third.

Both the defendant and the prosecutor can appeal the judgment before the Court of Appeal (rules on merit again, usually without gathering any other evidence) and even before the Corte di Cassazione, the highest Italian court (which cannot rule on merits, but only on correct procedure and correct interpretation of the law).

Plea Bargaining (Patteggiamento)

When the defendant deems that the punishment that would, concretely, be handed down is less than five-year imprisonment (or that it would just be a fine), he may plea-bargain with the prosecutor. The defendant is rewarded with a reduction in sentence and has other advantages (he does not pay the fees of the proceedings, etc.). The defendant must accept to plead guilty to the charges (even if the plea-bargained sentence has some particular matters in further compensation proceedings), no matter how serious they are. It could happen that the prosecutor agrees to reduce a charge, drop some of multiple charges in exchange for the defendant's guilty plea, often to a lesser offense.

The bargaining is not about the charges, but about the sentence, which is reduced by one third.

When both the prosecutor and the defendant have come to an agreement, the proposal is submitted to the Judge. He will, then, weigh the evidence and, if he is convinced that the defendant is not guilty, he must not accept the proposal and acquit the defendant (it happens seldom, if ever); if, on the contrary, he deems that the defendant is guilty and the judge agrees with the punishment, he must sanction the proposal. If the Judge deems the defendant to be guilty, but thinks that the proposed punishment is too light, he can refuse to accept the proposal and the proceedings will continue. The defendant can, however, ask that his proposal be accepted again.

If a Judge accepts a proposal by the prosecutor and the defendant, the judgment can be appealed only before the Corte di Cassazione, the highest Italian court (which cannot rule on merits, but only on correct procedure and correct interpretation of the law).

 

[acbytesla]

Have you seen the poll I conducted here on the footprint comparison?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=189522

The poll was not announced to the AK thread so most of the participants were unfamiliar whith these prints when responding.

I had seen the poll but it was a very long time ago. I also haven't looked at these prints in a very long time. Out of curiosity Dan, which print belong to Rudy and which to Raffale. I don't want to go back and look at the original. I just want to see if I picked Raffaele's or Rudy's. But either way I still don't think it is conclusive.

 

[Grinder]

I had seen the poll but it was a very long time ago. I also haven't looked at these prints in a very long time. Out of curiosity Dan, which print belong to Rudy and which to Raffale. I don't want to go back and look at the original. I just want to see if I picked Raffaele's or Rudy's. But either way I still don't think it is conclusive.

Which one had the hammer toe Tesla?

The prosecution's expert used the wide aspect of the big bath mat print to make the ID Raf. If the wide part of the big print was a smudge it becomes clear which foot it matches.

Of course the entire bloody feet and pants create a huge problem for the prosecution because supposedly three people were running shortly after the horrendous scream and the kids were in the plaza until just before midnight (sans Massei's correction for when disco left even though they weren't there that night).

So they killed Meredith and then took a shoe off or they did it bare footed and then washed put the shoe back on and ran out in a panic but not between 10:30 and 11:15 because of the tow truck but certainly before because of the digestion and then they circled around back to the plaza without Cura noticing them gone ever during the night.

They are there with the bloody knife and blood all over them but no one even notices them except a guy on heroin 50 meters away. Rudi tells us that it was full of people that evening as does Cura IIRC.

 

[acbytesla]

Which one had the hammer toe Tesla?

The prosecution's expert used the wide aspect of the big bath mat print to make the ID Raf. If the wide part of the big print was a smudge it becomes clear which foot it matches.

Of course the entire bloody feet and pants create a huge problem for the prosecution because supposedly three people were running shortly after the horrendous scream and the kids were in the plaza until just before midnight (sans Massei's correction for when disco left even though they weren't there that night).

So they killed Meredith and then took a shoe off or they did it bare footed and then washed put the shoe back on and ran out in a panic but not between 10:30 and 11:15 because of the tow truck but certainly before because of the digestion and then they circled around back to the plaza without Cura noticing them gone ever during the night.

They are there with the bloody knife and blood all over them but no one even notices them except a guy on heroin 50 meters away. Rudi tells us that it was full of people that evening as does Cura IIRC.

I'm embarrassed Grinder, but I don't even know what a hammer toe is.

All the analysis by everyone seems like bull to me. A backwards logic. A rationalization for their conclusion and not real science. If it is a match to one or the other, I should be able to see that. I can't. I know which one I think is the probable match...but I honestly don't have a clue at this moment which is Rudy's and which is Raffaele's.

So, which one belongs to Rudy and which one belongs to Raffale? Just tell me and let me say. ok..I was wrong..or I was right. Not that I think that is conclusive. I'm just curious.

 

[Bill Williams]

I'm embarrassed Grinder, but I don't even know what a hammer toe is.

All the analysis by everyone seems like bull to me. A backwards logic. A rationalization for their conclusion and not real science. If it is a match to one or the other, I should be able to see that. I can't. I know which one I think is the probable match...but I honestly don't have a clue at this moment which is Rudy's and which is Raffaele's.

So, which one belongs to Rudy and which one belongs to Raffale? Just tell me and let me say. ok..I was wrong..or I was right. Not that I think that is conclusive. I'm just curious.

In his motivations report, Judge Massei in 2010 quotes one of the experts who says it is useless to say anything about the bathmat from "image analysis", meaning that looking at a photo reveals nothing useful forensicly.

The one expert who did look at the mat concluded that Raffaele cannot be ruled out and that Rudy cannot be ruled in.

In short, despite Massei's eventual verdict against Raffaele, the bathmat is by Massei's own admission, fairly useless in convicting someone.

The case against Rudy is inside Meredith's bedroom. The IS no case against Raffaele.

 

[acbytesla]

In his motivations report, Judge Massei in 2010 quotes one of the experts who says it is useless to say anything about the bathmat from "image analysis", meaning that looking at a photo reveals nothing useful forensicly.

The one expert who did look at the mat concluded that Raffaele cannot be ruled out and that Rudy cannot be ruled in.

In short, despite Massei's eventual verdict against Raffaele, the bathmat is by Massei's own admission, fairly useless in convicting someone.

The case against Rudy is inside Meredith's bedroom. The IS no case against Raffaele.

Damn you Bill. I just wanted someone to tell me which is which!! lol.

Well at least Massei actually looked at this piece of evidence critically.

 

[Bill Williams]

Damn you Bill. I just wanted someone to tell me which is which!! lol.

Well at least Massei actually looked at this piece of evidence critically.

People here can make up their own minds. The following is what Massei records in his 2010 motivations reports about the bathmat. I'll be damned if Massei truly believes the bathmat reveals anything interesting to solve this case. It probably cannot be used even against Rudy Guede.

The witness Brocci specified that she was the one who did the evidence collecting in
the small bathroom, the one adjacent to the room of Meredith. .......

In this bathroom there was also a bathmat‚ soaked with blood substance where
there was printed a shape which morphologically could seem like a foot‛

the sky-blue bathmat with the
print of a bare foot in blood, blood which also was shown to be from the victim,
indicates that whoever went into this bathroom was barefoot, and must therefore
also have been barefoot in Meredith’s room where she had been repeatedly struck

The above
observation leads to the deduction that whoever went into the bathroom at that
point (after the stabbing of Meredith) must have had to do so to clean him/herself of
Meredith’s blood with which he/she was staining the various things he/she touched
or leaned against: the door, the light switch, the mat. And it is probable - not
necessary, but probable - that during the following act of scrubbing the hands to
remove the blood, he/she left the mixed trace consisting of Meredith’s blood and of
cells which had been removed by rubbing during the act of washing...

​

It is the above which leaves the sense that Massei is not ruling out that this is Amanda's footprint. Here he seems to be trying to set-up a link with what turns out to be his reason for convicting Knox, that her "biological material" is mixed in with Meredith's DNA through this act of scrubbing. (However, he eventually drops it in relation to the bathmat... but still, someone should tell Harry Rag that Massei sees absolutely no mixed blood at the cottage! Would someone please tell Harry Rag that!)

Continuing, the following the where Massei does not rule out Raffaele but also does not rule in Rudy... essentially saying the same thing about both of them. That the mat, esp. through simply looking at a photograph of it, reveals nothing, really, forensicly.

the Public Prosecutor charged Dr Rinaldi and Chief Inspector
Boemia with a second consultancy task.
The technicians were asked to: (.......

(2) compare the
footprints taken from those being investigated with the foot print found on the
bathmat in the so-called small bathroom of the Via della Pergola cottage;

Scientific Police reached an ‚opinion of probable identity‛ with respect to Sollecito's
right foot, having by a comparison of the footprint on the bathmat and the footprints
taken from Knox and Guede at least excluded the footprint's belonging to either of
the two co-accused.

Here, Massei is simply reporting the Scientific Police's conclusion. Rudy is ruled out, but Raffaele is not ruled out.

But wait for it.

Professor Vinci's report on the bathmat – we highlight this from the beginning -
completely contradicts the conclusions of the Rinaldi-Boemia consultancy.
Not only is the possibility of attributing (in the form of a "judgement of probable
identity") the bathmat footprint to Raffaele Sollecito or to Amanda Knox completely
denied, but it is somehow hypothesised that the print could have been made by the
right foot of Rudy Guede.

First of all as Vinci says, it is not a "print" it is a track or an "outline", a completely different thing in determining ownership.

Then there is Vinci's criticism of the Scientific Police only seeing a picture.

(Vinci) then criticised the fact that the
investigations were conducted uniquely on the basis of image analysis (Dr Rinaldi
did state that he had not seen the crime scene, as he did not participate in the
inspections, and that he worked only with the photographic materials that had been
made available to him, which in particular required correcting the perspective of the
tiles because the snapshots are not perfectly perpendicular), without any direct
examination of the bathmat on which the footprint was actually found.

All this to conclude, from Massei's point of view, that Massei accepts that the footprint is "probably" Raffaele's given the long and involved measurements of the foot and the "big toe" issue. Massei is abviously taking Professor Vinci seriously in giving so much print-space to Vinci's conclusions, but in the end says......

The consequence is that the Court does not hold as practicable the alternative
version aimed at confuting or undermining the judgement of probable identity
formulated by the Scientific Police, which instead finds itself strengthened.

In writing about Vinci's work, Massei still concludes that an equivalence with Rudy Guede's right foot is a "strained" equivalence.

What Massei leaves uncommented upon is why he views ANYTHING the Scientific Police said about the bathmat as forensicly interesting, given Vinci's criticism that you cannot do this work looking at pictures and images. You must have the mat in front of you.

Still.... Massei concludes that the "trace 2" (luminol-only print probably of Raffaele's, not proven as blood) is a "probable identity" with Raffaele, to the exclusion of Amanda and Rudy, although this statement of his is before his long, long discussion of Professor Vinci.

As to the bathmat, it is my opinionthat Massei basically says; Raffaele cannot be ruled out, and Rudy Guede cannot be positively id'ed.

Read Massei for yourselves. My bet is that Nencini will not discuss this at all.

 

[Planigale]

The literature discusses diabetes as a major contributor to slow digestive functioning. It could be a temporary malady as I have mentioned. Someone mention the girls' saying that Meredith wasn't feeling well, maybe it was more than a headache.

After doing the research I'm more convinced than ever that something is amiss on this issue. Later than 6:30 start of meal, chyme that slipped down or some malady that was missed.

I could go back for one of the alcohol discussions but Chris can voice his exact feelings about the work if he chooses. most recently he only said he would feel better about it if other tests had been performed.

Those tests are not esoteric yet Lalli didn't do them. The one sample was explained away because a container was alleged to have contained alcohol before being used IIRC while other evidence was stored improperly. The ILE did a second test that confirmed the one or two drinks (.43 ) Lalli also found. Does Chris agree? I don't know but he didn't used to.

I find it interesting that it so much more likely statistically both for the science and Italian police work that a mistake or mistakes were made yet the resistance here is immense.

The most recent vaunted studies show that Meredith not starting within an hour is highly unlikely and two hours nearly impossible yet the analysis here is that means she must have been killed immediately on return.

Without checking, one of the studies indicated that once 3 hours was reached 4 was almost as likely or was more... which would put a tail on the curve.

I'm sorry I wasn't here 3 or 4 years ago to help get this correct

Kaosium you still haven't provided a link to a study that demonstrates what the longest GE times are for healthy individuals.

You are now saying that since Lalli was incorrect with 2-3 hours that Introna had to alter his analysis because the court wouldn't believe the top forensic independent scientist. Is that correct?

Gastroparesis is a feature of autonomic neuropathy that only develops after years of diabetes, I think we can assume this is irrelevant. A variety of acute illnesses can cause gastroparesis, the most common would be a migraine, this would be a more likely explanation, did Ms. Kercher have migraines? Although the literature is scanty it appears gastric emptying time can be doubled in people with migraine as compared with normals and is prolonged even between attacks.
Headache. 2007 Nov-Dec;47(10):1443-6. Epub 2007 Sep 12.
Gastric stasis occurs in spontaneous, visually induced, and interictal migraine.
Aurora S1, Kori S, Barrodale P, Nelsen A, McDonald S.

Reading a bit further gastric emptying may be an hour longer in people with migraine vs. normals between attacks, how much is T lag vs T 1/2 is unknown.

 

[Kaosium]

The literature discusses diabetes as a major contributor to slow digestive functioning. It could be a temporary malady as I have mentioned. Someone mention the girls' saying that Meredith wasn't feeling well, maybe it was more than a headache.

After doing the research I'm more convinced than ever that something is amiss on this issue. Later than 6:30 start of meal, chyme that slipped down or some malady that was missed.

Chyme couldn't have slipped into the intestine, that was empty too except for the last loop the (ileum). The data is very simple, 500 cc in stomach, they started eating by every account before 7:00 PM. The length of the movie provides a clue, along with the fact they stopped it and she had to have time to get back to the cottage at about 9:00 PM.

In the autopsy, Dr. Lalli noted the following: "... oesophagus containing a fragment apparently a piece of mushroom (page 46) ... stomach containing 500 cc alimentary bolus, green brown in which were recognizable caseosis (mozzarella?) and vegetable fibre ... empty duodenum, small intestine containing digested material in the last loop ...‛ (pages 47 and 48 of report).

These claims were essentially repeated at the hearing on April 3, 2009 (see pages 36 and following the hearing transcripts, April 3, 2009) in which the presence of a fragment of mushroom in the opening of the lower stretch of oesophagus was confirmed, thus in a phase of non-digestion; Dr. Lalli specified that [110] death was considered as occurring not more than two to three hours after eating (page 47 of the hearing transcript, and the adjustment described in the footnote on February 13, 2008).

Every allowance can be given to the prosecution on this very basic data of 500 cc in stomach, nothing in the duodenum, nothing in the small intestine until the last loop (her lunch no doubt) and make 9:00 less unlikely, but then you add the half hour or more and you're back to where you think it impossible and 'question the data!' Maybe that's because no matter what you do, finding 500 cc in the stomach and nothing in the duodenum or small intestine strongly suggests it's always going to be more likely to happen earlier than later once you get notably past the median time.

I find it interesting that it so much more likely statistically both for the science and Italian police work that a mistake or mistakes were made yet the resistance here is immense.

It's very simple data, how much (500 cc) and was anything there (duodenum, small intestine). What he said it meant (no more than 2-3 hours) has been thoroughly analyzed. We're doing it yet again right now.

The most recent vaunted studies show that Meredith not starting within an hour is highly unlikely and two hours nearly impossible yet the analysis here is that means she must have been killed immediately on return.

Yes, that curve would lead to the conclusion that 3.0 was much more likely than 2.5 hours. After all it would have suggested anything past 8:30 (assuming a 6:30 start) was, as you put it 'nearly impossible' and since you describe it as basically the difference between three standard (highly unlikely) deviations from the mean and four (almost impossible) no matter what you do five or six is going to be more unlikely even accounting for the skew.

Personally it would seem more rational to use studies and data that make those conditions being present at 9:00 more likely but doing it your way just makes it less likely Raffaele and Amanda could have been involved. It doesn't change the 500 cc in stomach, nothing in the duodenum and the fact you must account for those conditions persisting for another half hour which is what matters here.

Using data that makes it even more impossible for Raffaele and Amanda being involved simply to make the result we know occurred less likely so you 'question the data' is a user error and basically clears Raffaele and Amanda anyway.

Without checking, one of the studies indicated that once 3 hours was reached 4 was almost as likely or was more... which would put a tail on the curve.

Yes there would be tail on the curve, no it doesn't mean that 4 hours was just as likely as three, it can't because the curve must hit zero soon because reality imposes a limit that if you do not start digesting you die and there's absolutely no data after 200 minutes in any study ever posted or I could find on my own.

I'm sorry I wasn't here 3 or 4 years ago to help get this correct

Kaosium you still haven't provided a link to a study that demonstrates what the longest GE times are for healthy individuals.

Here is the abstract of the one I've (mostly) been talking about and I've pointed out you've posted numerous times. This information will tell you what the curve looks like:

However, the T1/2 and T(lag) of solid meals did not fit to normal distribution and thus median and percentiles were determined. The median time of T1/2 for solids was 127 min (25-75% percentiles: 112.0-168.3 min) and 81.5 min for T(lag) (25-75% percentiles: 65.5-102.0 min).

This one has the outliers of 170 min and 200 min.

You are now saying that since Lalli was incorrect with 2-3 hours that Introna had to alter his analysis because the court wouldn't believe the top forensic independent scientist. Is that correct?

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Lalli saying it could have been at most 2-3 hours is the corrected data (3-4 was the first figure) and a reasonable interpretation of the literature for the outer limit. However 2.0 is much more likely than 2.5 and 2.5 is much more likely than 3.0. Remember you must split the curve to take into account the fact we know she didn't die before 9 PM (or if you question that it still means Raffaele and Amanda aren't involved).

 

[Kaosium]

Thanks Anglo I thought they found it but was too lazy to find a cite.

Eating of the mushroom is impossible because she must have been killed immediately on return because of the GE factors

Although I haven't done research on this mushroom timing thing, since it wasn't in digestive state it couldn't have been eaten more than a few minutes before death. Now we can't know if she ate just as she returned or some time later. Was there a bottle of wine in the refrigerator or somewhere else? Chris has pointed out that no alcohol was found in the stomach so that would mean if she drank that night and didn't drink at the girls' she would need a few minutes alive after the drink.

The mushroom is very interesting in that it seems to prove that she didn't walk into an immediate attack.

No, it doesn't say that at all. Let me put it this way: saying it's more likely to be 9:00 than 9:30 incorporates all the possible times from 9-9:30 (9:01, 9:02 etc) and compares them to the ones after 9:30 PM. It will be more pronounced because we can eliminate anything before 9:00 PM as we've good reason to think it didn't happen then, and if it did then Raffaele and Amanda couldn't have been involved anyway.

 

[kwill]

Chyme couldn't have slipped into the intestine, that was empty too except for the last loop the (ileum). The data is very simple, 500 cc in stomach, they started eating by every account before 7:00 PM. The length of the movie provides a clue, along with the fact they stopped it and she had to have time to get back to the cottage at about 9:00 PM


Every allowance can be given to the prosecution on this very basic data of 500 cc in stomach, nothing in the duodenum, nothing in the small intestine until the last loop (her lunch no doubt) and make 9:00 less unlikely, but then you add the half hour or more and you're back to where you think it impossible and 'question the data!' Maybe that's because no matter what you do, finding 500 cc in the stomach and nothing in the duodenum or small intestine strongly suggests it's always going to be more likely to happen earlier than later once you get notably past the median time.

It's very simple data, how much (500 cc) and was anything there (duodenum, small intestine). What he said it meant (no more than 2-3 hours) has been thoroughly analyzed. We're doing it yet again right now.

Yes, that curve would lead to the conclusion that 3.0 was much more likely than 2.5 hours. After all it would have suggested anything past 8:30 (assuming a 6:30 start) was, as you put it 'nearly impossible' and since you describe it as basically the difference between three standard (highly unlikely) deviations from the mean and four (almost impossible) no matter what you do five or six is going to be more unlikely even accounting for the skew.

Personally it would seem more rational to use studies and data that make those conditions being present at 9:00 more likely but doing it your way just makes it less likely Raffaele and Amanda could have been involved. It doesn't change the 500 cc in stomach, nothing in the duodenum and the fact you must account for those conditions persisting for another half hour which is what matters here.
Using data that makes it even more impossible for Raffaele and Amanda being involved simply to make the result we know occurred less likely so you 'question the data' is a user error and basically clears Raffaele and Amanda anyway.

Yes there would be tail on the curve, no it doesn't mean that 4 hours was just as likely as three, it can't because the curve must hit zero soon because reality imposes a limit that if you do not start digesting you die and there's absolutely no data after 200 minutes in any study ever posted or I could find on my own.

Here is the abstract of the one I've (mostly) been talking about and I've pointed out you've posted numerous times. This information will tell you what the curve looks like:

This one has the outliers of 170 min and 200 min.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Lalli saying it could have been at most 2-3 hours is the corrected data (3-4 was the first figure) and a reasonable interpretation of the literature for the outer limit.

However 2.0 is much more likely than 2.5 and 2.5 is much more likely than 3.0. Remember you must split the curve to take into account the fact we know she didn't die before 9 PM

(or if you question that it still means Raffaele and Amanda aren't involved).

Heroic effort, Kaosium. I don't know how it could be said more clearly. Perhaps there could be a quiz to discover if people understand what you mean by "you must split the curve and why that is necessary."

 

[Dan O.]

Random thoughts:
If it was mushroom, where was the rest of the mushroom, in her kitchen garbage can? Did she take a bite and toss the rest?

Heck, did the guys downstairs have mushrooms in their frig?

You fixate on the raw mushrooms in the fridge to the point of speculating if there were mushrooms in some other fridge and ignore completely the leftover pizza in the oven.

But the fact is that this object was never tested to determine if it was a piece of mushroom. And whether it was mushroom or apple, if it never reached the stomach, the digestion process would not have begun so there is no practical way to say how long it could have been trapped there.