Was it Samson who had the image of the golfer holing his approach on the 18th to take it to a play off? I like that! They did that with the knife. They also holed in one at the first sudden death extra hole when they 'found' the bra clasp.
I know this has been said before and I'm not claiming it's original but given that Amanda broke down in tears when asked to check all the kitchen knives were still there (a key moment in the investigation!) surely that was a clue that ought to have induced them to test those knives. That they did not must be assigned to something. Was it mind-blowing incompetence or just fraud? Is there a third possibility? What is it? Supercal is an expert on possibility. Maybe s/he has a theory.
Anglo also offered in response to my questions;
Originally Posted by carbonjam72
Beautiful. Now, when do you believe the framing began against Amanda and Raf?
Do you agree the interrogation was pre-planned and designed to soften them up from the outset, i.e. day 1, culminating 4-5 days later in the full on tag-team press with a dozen agents from Rome in the dark of night?
And, do you have a position on whether the immediate claim of 'staged break-in' is honestly stupid, or to cover up in case Guede is responsible and they screwed up in letting him remain free?
((ANGLO ->) The framing began on the 6th at the latest. The interrogation was not planned on day 1 (but why can't we have disclosure of internal notes and memoranda briefing for it and fixing it up - oh, sorry, I forgot, Manuela decides what's relevant). They really did think the break-in was staged because no one could climb that high and nothing was stolen.
You're saying the framing began on Nov 6th at the latest. I agree there are clear signs of framing on the 6th. For one, the prosecution deliberately lied when they said there was a clean-up at the cottage. Having seen footprints revealed by Luminol, they must have known it was impossible there was a clean-up, or the footprints would have been expurgated in a cloud of bleach. Stefanoni also testified at the first trial that she had not run blood tests to confirm the foot prints were made in blood, but it came out in the Hellman appeal that she had run the blood tests on the footprints, and they came out negative for blood. So they lied about the evidence, and knew they were lying, on Nov 6th at the press conference.
Also on Nov 6th, And Chris Halkides can speak more authoritatively on this point, is the selection of the knife, at random from Raf's kitchen drawer. The officer pulls the big shiny knife out and says 'is this ok', and the senior officer says, "that will do", according to Raf's Book.
From reading Dr Mark Waterbury, "Monster of Perugia; The Framing of Amanda Knox", offers this statement regarding the finding of Kercher's DNA on the knife from Raf's kitchen, (at pg 101):
All of this gives us a solid basis to arrive at an estimate of the amount of DNA that was present on the blade of Rafaele's kitchen knife. None. There was no DNA on that knife. The polizia could have pulled the knife out of a bath of sulfuric acid and the profile tests would have come out the same. The DNA in the profile came from Stefanoni's laboratory, or, possibly, the extremely clumsy handling and shipping, it did not originate from the knife."
If I read the analysis of Dr Waterbury correctly, Stefanoni was able to accomplish a match by blowing up the noise in the results at the bottom of the data graphs, not from additional DNA amplification. In this way, having Meredith profile to work off of, she can match background noise to Meredith's DNA and create the appearance of "finding a match".
Stefanoni's procedure, if I understand it correctly, is specifically designed to generate a fraudulent false positive match, solely to support a conviction. In other words,
frame a defendant. When the appeals court experts say something to the effect, it is not supported by scientifically valid analysis, that's a Italian speak for fraud, no? It's more than just scientifically unsupported, its deliberately rigged to achieve a falsely incriminating finding.
That's why any knife that the cop pulls from Raf's kitchen draw "will do". Because they can find the same match on any knife, or for that matter, any object at all. Even a negative control, no? The last act necessary to achieving this fraud, is to refuse to turn over the underlying data that shows how the results were achieved.
Now Anglo, return to your mention that the police brought Amanda and the two room mates back to the cottage, was it Nov 3rd or 4th? They wanted Amanda to stick her hand in a drawer of unused/rarely used kitchen utensils, and she brakes down crying. The incident is described in Amanda's book, a first hand account. She broke down
when requested she put her hand in the draw.
If she had reached into the drawer and touched any knife, wouldn't we expect that had Stefanoni tested that knife, 'it would also do'? If Amanda had put her hand in that draw, they wouldn't have had to grab the knife from Raf's apt, they have had the one Amanda touched and achieved the same result; Amanda's DNA on the handle, Meredith's DNA on the blade.
Have you ever had a gut feeling of fear and terror in a dangerous situation? Your mind doesn't necessarily follow what's happening, but your gut takes over and tells you something important is happening. May I suggest Amanda's breaking down and crying when asked to put her hand in that drawer, is just that kind of parallel semi-conscious gut reaction to the police trying to frame her.
Stefanoni's process is to achieve fraudulent results in the lab to support convictions. If evidence tests go against the police, she claims she didn't perform them, or suppresses the results. Yes she gets personally criticized for unprofessional conduct and not knowing what she's doing. But the defense is denied exculpatory evidence, and the prosecution wins their cases. And ultimately she achieves her primary job function;
helping her bosses win convictions.
The same practice can be applied to the finding of DNA on the bra clasp. That's why these 'hail mary' passes always seem to connect. With Stefanoni's method, she can't miss. As long as she has the DNA profile in front of her, to which she's trying to find a match. That's why the testing is supposed to be done blind, to avoid the possibility of bias. That's why Stefanoni uses the profiles to assist her "tests", she needs them, or the magic trick won't work.
Putting aside what counts for proof in a court room, I'm asserting this consistently fraudulent methodology by Stefanoni, in combination with the police trying to get Amanda to touch a drawer of potentially "compatible" murder weapons, establishes the police intent to frame Amanda when they brought her to the cottage on Nov 3rd or 4th.
ANGLO; - You offer the absence of prosecution notes (I get facetious), as a reason to doubt the interrogations were pre-planned from day one. In Amanda's book, Ficarra is quoted on I believe Nov 2nd or 3rd, making an odd statement that the Public MInister will have something to say in a few days. Put that aside.
I believe its in the book, "Rudy Guede; The Forgotten Suspect", John Douglas, Steve Moore, Judge Heavey, possibly, specifically descrbe the text book process for breaking defendants. It appears to have been followed to the letter in this case,
from DAY 1. You simply state the process wasn't planned. That is pure conjecture. In the absence of other evidence, that might mean a push. I'm going to hate myself for saying this, but in the presence of additional evidence affirmatively showing the presence of framing, we must conclude, osmotically, that
it is more likely consistent with framing from day 1, then an accidental resemblance to text book "softening up" in a pre-planned interrogation from Day 1.
Last point Anglo; I'll leave you with a quote from CodyJuneau, who just nails the issue as to whether they might have imagined the climb up to the second story was possible, given the presence of metal grating underneath, (unlike the police, we have access to various videos demonstrating how easy such a grate assisted climb is for an athletic person, as Guede certainly was). (As to whether the police knew or suspected it might actually be Guede, no explanation has yet been offered regarding his release by the Milan police, or the failure of the Perugians to prosecute him for burglary in a case where they knew he was in possession of stolen property from that robbery, five days befor the Kercher killing):
Without further delay, CodyJuneau, take it away....
But Grinder, upper floor break ins must NEVER happen in Perugia. Every cop in the prosecution team was sure it was an impossible task to climb a grate to get in an upper story window, maybe doable with a team of Sherpas assisting, but never by a lone burglar.
They no doubt surmised the break in at the law office was staged and Rudy was just some poor dupe that bought goods the lawyers had pawned to some one. Poor Rudy! And I am sure he was duped into thinking the nursery school he was staying at was a bed and breakfast. Poor Rudy!
You have zero evidence of a collaborator, just like RVWBWL who is on a wild goose chase to find some. So what if Koko's phone pinged? That does not mean he was involved. If there was a ping then I suspect it simply afforded Mig/the cops to lean on him to give some fabricated evidence which would explain why his evidence turned out not to make not a word of sense. 
