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

[anglolawyer]

Problem is that it is a "procedural fact" that Rudy was not cut before he left for Germany. That is, it is a fact decided in a different judicial proceeding (Guede's trial), which is deemed to collaterally estop Knox and Sollecito in their trial.

The evidence upon which this judicial finding was made appears to consist of out-of-court statements to the police, that two or three of Guede's friends made, to the effect that they didn't notice cuts on Guede's hand before he left, although there is no testimony that they ever look at his hands and the court admits that there are reasons (failure to report) for these friends to deny knowledge of any such cuts.

This is clown-show justice.

In addition to which there are Guede's own statements which also provide decisive evidence against Knox and Sollecito, whether made in court or not (whether made at all or not? ).

As we know from our studies of Italian law, such circumstances (e.g. that Rudy's hands were not cut before he left for Germany) acquire probative value only when multiple pieces of evidence can all be traced to a single cause or a single effect. In applying this, therefore, the judge must first examine each item of evidence, identifying all its possible logical connections, then ascertaining their gravity, which is inversely proportional to the number of such connections, as well as the precision, which is correlated to the sharpness of the item's contours, the clarity of its representation, to the direct or indirect source of knowledge from which it derives, and thus to its reliability.

I thought it worth reminding everybody of that as we are sometimes in danger of forgetting it.

 

[Diocletus]

As we know from our studies of Italian law, such circumstances (e.g. that Rudy's hands were not cut before he left for Germany) acquire probative value only when multiple pieces of evidence can all be traced to a single cause or a single effect. In applying this, therefore, the judge must first examine each item of evidence, identifying all its possible logical connections, then ascertaining their gravity, which is inversely proportional to the number of such connections, as well as the precision, which is correlated to the sharpness of the item's contours, the clarity of its representation, to the direct or indirect source of knowledge from which it derives, and thus to its reliability.

Either that, or they decide what outcome they want and then just make stuff up.

 

[Ogantai]

I jus point out Stefanoni is not a "technician", she is an expert in molecular biology, has a PhD and she is a high officer in charge of forensic investigations.

What do you mean that Stephoney has a PhD? Pretends to have Doctorate? Perjured herself Daily? Perpetually hides Data?

 

[Bill Williams]

"By the time the Scientific Police arrive at the crime scene, the place has been visited by not so professional policemen or investigators."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-rv_BZ4uzk​

One needs to watch this all. It is from 2009 and shows Italian criticism of Mignini's handling of this case.

 

[acbytesla]

It is almost impossible to argue that the storage of the bra clasp was incompetence. There is no reason for storing an item of evidence in the presence of an aqueous solution (DNA extraction buffer). And the CSC said nothing of this.

Really Chris? What better way to ensure that no one can review your work? Such an innocent mistake...but is it really? Shouldn't a DNA technician know better then to store something in a plastic bag? Maybe it is the paranoia in me, but this seems more like a deliberate incompetence.

Is it just me, or does the number of coincidences of incompetent mistakes that benefit the prosecution and prevent the defense from adequately doing their job seem more than just coincidences at some point?

 

[anglolawyer]

Really Chris? What better way to ensure that no one can review your work? Such an innocent mistake...but is it really? Shouldn't a DNA technician know better then to store something in a plastic bag? Maybe it is the paranoia in me, but this seems more like a deliberate incompetence.

Is it just me, or does the number of coincidences of incompetent mistakes that benefit the prosecution and prevent the defense from adequately doing their job seem more than just coincidences at some point?

If you had read my post on Italian law carefully you would have understood that this point (the storing of the clasp) is precise. It has very few possible logical connections (whatever that means) in that it can only be attributed to professional error or deliberate fraud and therefore its gravity is high. All of which is to say nothing of the sharpness of the contours, clarity of representation or the direct or indirect source of knowledge from which it derives and thus its reliability.

Actually, this is all bull **** isn't it?

 

[acbytesla]

Massei and Nencini differ radically on their use of "procedural facts". Massei at least has the decency to write about all the options relevant to a trial solely with Knox and Sollecito in mind.

Nencini adopts as "procedural facts" issues imported from Guede's fast track trial. It is suggested that Nencini had been order to do this by Cassazione.

From my perspective the term "procedural facts" says it all. Not just "the facts" or "the truth", Nencini finds it necessary to use the qualifier "procedural". It is as you said, that clearly Nencini was following his marching orders.

We could all see this verdict coming after we read the screwed up ruling by the Cassazione.

 

[Grinder]

Mach you are knowledgeable on many things, and your input here is helpful. But biology is not your forte, you really should not state as facts things that are not true. Bone and cartilage are connective tissue, cartilage in particular is almost cell free and will contain very little DNA. Bone cartilage and muscle would have been seen when the knife was examined, in fact did not Stefanoni in fact observe cellular material? Cellular material that turned out to be starch granules? The presence of which indicates that the knife had not been thoroughly cleaned? So the knife was examined for the type of material you refer to and it was absent. The catalytic tests for haemoglobin are very sensitive and can detect only a few molecules. to get a DNA profile you need intact many DNA molecules.

Haemoglobin is a 'tough' molecule it is resistant to cleaning and will get in to crevasses. DNA is relatively soluble, and degrades easily so no profile is extractable. The quantity of haemoglobin is massively greater than DNA in blood. If this knife were the murder weapon it cut a major vessel, causing massive bleeding, it would have been covered in blood. The ratio of haemoglobin to blood is orders of magnitude different than any differences in sensitivity testing, 30,000,000,000 : 1. Check the literature. Read the references given above.

As a simple sense check, take the luminol positive traces that you ascribe to being blood. They gave a strong presumptive test for blood, but they were negative for DNA.

As an aside I also would argue that the relative ratios of Knox and Kercher DNA also prove that Knox DNA could not have arisen at the time of the crime if the knife was used in the crime. To be put simply any knife used in the way proposed would contain far more DNA of the victim than the wielder, any cleaning would clean the DNA of victim and wielder equally. The ratios would remain the same. That there was a significant amount of Knox DNA on the handle is agreed. Using this observation to argue that Knox was the wielder of the knife is just wrong.

Thanks.

I would imagine that the prosecution would maintain that the knife could have been washed many times after the murder use. That would mean that the DNA on the handle would not necessarily have been there immediately after the murder. Amanda's DNA on the knife 4 days after means only that she used it last or put it away.

My any chance to you have a good source on sensitivities of TMB versus Luminol?

 

[Grinder]

If Nencini has moved the Naruto time back by 6 minutes in order to give them time to get to the Piazza by 9.27 there should be some factual basis. If the factual basis is as acbytesla says then Nencini is a genius who has brilliantly encapsulated the idiocy of the Italian judiciary in one finding. It's got to be a very deep joke.

Dear, dear Anglo, how often must it be explained to you/

9:20 is compatible with a 9:27 plaza appearance and only two more are needed for a match.

It would be good to see the experts report on Raf's computer.

A little more difficult to look to the police experts on this issue

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the storage of the bra clasp is puzzling

Really Chris? What better way to ensure that no one can review your work? Such an innocent mistake...but is it really? Shouldn't a DNA technician know better then to store something in a plastic bag? Maybe it is the paranoia in me, but this seems more like a deliberate incompetence.

It is more likely that the person who stored the clasp was attempting to make it rot and rust than any other explanation. I cannot think of any reason to expose it to aqueous buffer. This is actually strange, because even if the bra clasp were initially tampered with to obtain the mixed profile, there is no obvious way that later examination would reveal tampering. For example, if the clasp were reswabbed and no more DNA were found, this could be explained by claiming that all of the DNA was extracted on the first pass in 2007.

 

[anglolawyer]

Dear, dear Anglo, how often must it be explained to you/

9:20 is compatible with a 9:27 plaza appearance and only two more are needed for a match.

It would be good to see the experts report on Raf's computer.

A little more difficult to look to the police experts on this issue

Thanks for the reminder. One must be imbued with the spirit of these things to really get what's going on. A further compatibility is - we know with certainty where A and R were on the night of 31st Oct and it was not the piazza, therefore Toto must have seen them on the 1st, disco buses or no stinking disco buses. We just need one more and it's caso chiuso on this point. Maybe the clincher is that he identified them 'not once, but twice' in court, thereby proving his 'extraordinary accuracy'. Yes, I think we can take that to the bank now.

 

[acbytesla]

If you had read my post on Italian law carefully you would have understood that this point (the storing of the clasp) is precise. It has very few possible logical connections (whatever that means) in that it can only be attributed to professional error or deliberate fraud and therefore its gravity is high. All of which is to say nothing of the sharpness of the contours, clarity of representation or the direct or indirect source of knowledge from which it derives and thus its reliability.

Actually, this is all bull **** isn't it?

That is a good word for it Anglo. I can't just say it was incompetence, if it was me storing it, I might have put it in a plastic bag...but surely the tech would know better. There isn't really a single bit of physical evidence left that anyone can verify that was true. Stefanoni prevented anyone from seeing the electronic files, and her evidence solely relies on non-existent DNA on a knife and non existent DNA on a bra clasp that mysteriously turned up 46 days later and now is corrupted and worthless.

"How convenient"..the Church Lady would say.

 

[Diocletus]

Own Goal Alert

Guilters are circulating this graphic, which shows how thorough the trial process was how little Nencini and his jury knew and heard about the facts of the case:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BmjrZYTCYAEkXfy.png:large

 

[acbytesla]

It is more likely that the person who stored the clasp was attempting to make it rot and rust than any other explanation. I cannot think of any reason to expose it to aqueous buffer. This is actually strange, because even if the bra clasp were initially tampered with to obtain the mixed profile, there is no obvious way that later examination would reveal tampering. For example, if the clasp were reswabbed and no more DNA were found, this could be explained by claiming that all of the DNA was extracted on the first pass in 2007.

It is weird. If Stefanoni had provided the EDF files and not have played games with her testimony such as failing to mention the negative TMB tests etc and the negative controls I might not be thinking like some crazy conspiracist.

Maybe it is just paranoia, but these coincidences of total incompetence seem ridiculous. As an IT guy, I still can't get beyond the 4 hard drives. But maybe I shouldn't be so paranoid about the possibility of evidence tampering, it is clear that true evidence isn't really needed in Italy.

 

[Diocletus]

Dear, dear Anglo, how often must it be explained to you/

9:20 is compatible with a 9:27 plaza appearance and only two more are needed for a match.

It does match three times! Both have a "9" a ":" and a "2". Therefore, "9:20" matches "9:27" in Eye-talian.

 

[anglolawyer]

Jay over at IIP has produced a pretty serviceable translation of pp310-325 of Nencini in this post.

We know with certainty, because this gives us the framework circumstantial , that immediately after the murder inside of the house on Via della Pergola there was the presence of three people , two men and a woman certainly . This is shown by the outcome of the investigation of genetic and outcome of the examination of the traces highlighted by the technique of luminol . We can also say that one of the men stepped on the blood of Meredith Kercher left a visible trace of his foot on a pad of cotton blue color found inside the small bathroom of the house. This footprint was attributed by the investigators , with an attribution that this Court shares on the basis of the above considerations , the right foot bare Raffaele Sollecito . One of the tracks detected by the technique of lurninol was then attributed by the police to a woman's foot comspondente , to measure , to that of Amanda Marie Knox ; as were attributed to Amanda Marie Knox mixed DNA traces found in the small bathroom dell'appaflarnento (sink, bidet and a box of cotton buds ) .
We have essentially circumstantial evidence of safe custody, multiple and consistent, that place Herrnann Rudi Guede, Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito inside the house on Via della Pergola on the evening of the murder of Meredith Kercher, at later stages in the immediate 'murder, when the three left traces of their passage for blood deposition of the victim's blood that was leaking profusely from his wounds.

On motive after rejecting the Crini's crap theory

The fact that the relationship between the American girl and th English girl were not idyllic adequately illuminated by the testimony of the English girls examined during the first stage of the proceedings; and is the same Arnanda Marie Knox, in his interrogation before the Court of Assizes of Perugia, he made reference to the difficulties of their relationship with the victim, although devaluing the condition.
Finally, the statements made by Rudi Hermann Guede made during interrogation following his arrest. Reported, the Guede, Meredith Kercher, on the evening when he was murdered, he had discovered a shortfall of cash from his room, and immediately had attributed such removal to Amanda Marie Knox. Apart from the fact of the merits or otherwise of the charge that the victim moved to the American girl, what is interesting to observe in this condition reported by Guede, is the fact that, in the face of objective seriousness of an event, such as the subtraction of money to 'interior of an apartment inhabited by tasks girls, if you are living a situation of inevitable promiscuity, the English girl immediately attributed this behavior to Amanda Marie Knox; this circumstance only compatible with a negative assessment of the personality of the defendant by the victim.

The mystery of the missing 300 Euros. What possible explanation can there be?

Even Rudy Hermann Guede was acquitted of the crime of theft (in his case by the entire indictment) pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 530 of the GUP of Perugia court for not having committed the crime. It must be considered that the Judges have considered the fact that evidence totally unpunished, because the body of the entire sentence is not found on any assessment point.
In any case, and noting that both defendants and Hemann Rudi Guede were all acquitted of the crime of theft in relation to the imputation with reference to three hundred Euros and two credit cards, the fact remains that neither the money nor the cards credit have never been found; as well as the fact remains that on the evening of November 1, 2007 does not appear that others have entered inside the house on Via della Pergola over to the accused and Rudy Hermann Guede

A weird scenario:

We know from the statements made by the accused that on the evening of November 1, 2007 Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito made use of drugs, and had sex. Amanda Marie Knox puts the condition inside the apartment in Via Garibaldi number 130 in the hour of the evening in which both defendants were definitely elsewhere, and reasonably just inside of the house (the presence of a cigarette butt inside ashtray 'home was present with the mixed DNA of Amanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, however, of a woven cigarette, it could be a significant element in this sense, although the Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, specifically requested on this point, stating that they were not chemical analyzes were performed on the findings, but only those aimed at the identification of the DNA, and therefore nothing certain can be inferred from this finding).
The fact is that within the house, one hour after 22:00 in the evening, he could have created a situation in which Arnanda Marie Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were collected in intimacy, also making use of narcotic, Meredith Kercher was in her room and Rudi Hermann Guede used the house to his liking.

The knife, now bearing Raff's DNA also, is retrieved:

The knife, with a blade length of about 31 cm, was seized by police in the apartment of Raffaele Sollecito during the first raid carried out there. The judicial police officer who actually withdrew from the drawer where they were pinned cutlery stated during the trial of first instance clie his attention had been struck by the fact that the knife, and not others in the same drawer, was much more clean with respect to the generality of the cutlery, so let imagine that it had been washed with care and recently. This circumstance, which might appear a matter of personal perception and irrelevant, led to important conclusions in the process. Examined by the forensic knife, its blade, in a series of streaks almost imperceptible to the naked eye, was found mixed DNA of two contributors: Meredith Kercher and Raffaele Sollecito.

Amanda's DNA on a different knife (reliable translation needed):

On a different knife was also found useful to track containing DNA examination, the track that was being analyzed by Dr. Patrizia Stefanoni, who attributed the track to the DNA of Amanda Marie Knox. This assignment did not suffer claims by the defenses of the defendants, and the case can be considered as a common ground.

THis is the part Mach considers to be an improvement on Massei on explaining the transport of the knife:

The Judges of first instance, taking charge of explaining the reason why a large kitchen knife had been transported from the house of Raffaele Sollecito to the cottage in Via della Pergola speculated that the knife had been placed in the large bag that Amanda Marie Knox had used the night of the murder, and that it was there because she had taken from the house of Raffaele Sollecito and placed in the bag to eventually use it for self-defense in her night shifts. The fact has been strongly criticized by the defenses of the accused; as well as the defense of the accused have observed that if the knife in question had actually been the murder weapon, the defendants they would definitely get rid of.
With regard to the first question, the Court considers that the explanation given by the first judges in itself has also the reasonableness; and in any case we must not forget that Garibaldi Street nr 130 is a few hundred meters from the house on Via della Pergola and Amanda Marie Knox was in fact elected the home of Sollecito as his second home, dividing her time between the house and the house of girlfriend Via della Pergola. Having thus charged the full availability of the two houses, the reasons for which a kitchen knife in each one of them has been found in the other in a given night may be multiple, and all reasonable.
In this case, what matters is the availability of the weapon chile by inputati, its concrete portability from one house to the other, its compatibility with the harmful event and the presence of the DNA of Meredith Kercher on the blade of knife. All of these factual allegations in the trial thus lead to the conclusion that the knife reperted nr 36) constitutes one of the weapons used in the assault; and the weapon with which Amanda Marie Knox swung the fatal blow to the throat of Meredith Kercher.

So, if the knife had been 12 feet long and weighed a couple of tons, it would not have been portable and could not have been used without a truck and some lifting equipment and there is no evidence they had any since Curatolo made no mention of them. They did not get rid of the knife because of the landlord inventory problem.

The scream Nara heard was Meredith's:

Surely the blow that caught the right side of the neck, with a modest and certainly not likely to cause death, however, was a shot that produced a sharp pain that scream and certainly occasioned excruciating the victim that was perceived by Nara Capezzal and Maria Ilaria Dramis, who reported it in the examination hearing; [a] scream mentioned also [by] Amanda Marie Knox in the memorial seized and produced in court.

 

[Desert Fox]

I would love someone like Richard Dawkins to weigh in on this case. Would you take an opinion from him seriously? My presumption is that his science accords with yours on creationism.

Why is the silence of so many qualified people so deafening, when this controversy is so uniquely solved by science?

Like to see Steve Novella weigh in myself. Since AK/RS were effectively convicted with woo.

They do have other issues. . . .Granted, Amanda is an atheist so would be nice to get some atheist support for her.

 

[GWCarver]

Machiavelli,

I looked around, and as far as I can tell, the source of the "freshly bleached" quote on the internet is Ann Coulter. So, I won't be using it again until I find the original source, if there is one.

In any case, MichaelB was kind enough to post some testimony from Armando Finzi above (#5269), and this translation has him testifying he noticed the knife was "very clean" and he thought it might match the wounds on Meredith, although he hadn't seen them. What that really means, to me, is he had no reason to pick the knife up and put it into evidence, but he did it anyway.

BTW, what are the chances of those controls Nencini looked at being made public? Why not leak something that would blow the case wide-open for the prosecution?



"

 

[Grinder]

Thanks for the reminder. One must be imbued with the spirit of these things to really get what's going on. A further compatibility is - we know with certainty where A and R were on the night of 31st Oct and it was not the piazza, therefore Toto must have seen them on the 1st, disco buses or no stinking disco buses. We just need one more and it's caso chiuso on this point. Maybe the clincher is that he identified them 'not once, but twice' in court, thereby proving his 'extraordinary accuracy'. Yes, I think we can take that to the bank now.

It's been a long strange trip but you are finally getting it.

 

[Bill Williams]

Judge Hellmann himself is now speaking out on the ridiculousness of the reasoning of the Nencini report.

Please remember, those who criticize Hellmann say that he was bought off my a Masonic conspiracy, and they even know the amount of Euros it took to corrupt Hellmann and Zanetti.

Yet, Hellmann is not going to go quietly. Judge Hellmann led the 2011 panel which acquitted Sollecito and Knox, an acquittal which was overturned by Cassazione in March 2013.

http://edition.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/crime/2014/05/01/amanda-knox-interview-preview-cuomo-newday.cnn.html​

The "debate" is now where it belongs, where the party of the PM's is seeking to wrongfully convict two innocents to preserve their own power in Italy.