Continuation Part 12: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Dan O.]

No, I think all of those Guede show prints in the hallway and kitchen area are from the right shoe.

But at least one of them (I, I think) is facing back towards Kercher's room, and two of them (J and Y, I think) are side by side. This indicates unequivocally that - contrary to certain pro-guilt commentators' misguided and prejudiced beliefs - Guede stopped in his tracks well before reaching the front door, and almost certainly turned and made his way back towards the bedroom.

No.

[IMGL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=30303&d=1393000877[/IMGL]The sequence is F, I, Y, H (H is in front of the couch below J). These are all from the left shoe as are the prints on the pillow case, at the foot of the bed in Kercher's room and in the hall. The bare print on the mat in the small bath is from a right foot. In the tracts above, G and J are from a different sequence.

 

[carbonjam72]

No.

[IMGL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=30303&d=1393000877[/IMGL]The sequence is F, I, Y, H (H is in front of the couch below J). These are all from the left shoe as are the prints on the pillow case, at the foot of the bed in Kercher's room and in the hall. The bare print on the mat in the small bath is from a right foot. In the tracts above, G and J are from a different sequence.

Is there a complete inventory anywhere of these 'visible footprints', including their location, and orientation, as well as the one (or more) footprints that were erased by the police forensics team (do we still have any idea how or why that happened?), and also any luminol footprints (along with results for TMB and DNA)?

It would help to have everything in one place, or on one map, to see how it all fits together.

 

[Wannaknow]

No.

The sequence is F, I, Y, H (H is in front of the couch below J). These are all from the left shoe as are the prints on the pillow case, at the foot of the bed in Kercher's room and in the hall. The bare print on the mat in the small bath is from a right foot. In the tracts above, G and J are from a different sequence.

The sequence may be F, I, Y. But what about H ? H is much, much clearer then traces I and Y, both showing only a tiny part of the sole. Why is this ?

Greetings

 

[Wannaknow]

The simple answer is that the shoe that produced the"H" tract was facing away from the door.

Then let us turn around H 180 degrees and then compare the blood pattern with F.

Now that is really hard do decide. On the upper part of H, there are some blood traces which cannot be seen in F, so I tend to say that H is right print though I am not sure.

Greetings

 

[LondonJohn]

D'oh I meant left! And I misremembered which print letters were which, but at least I was generally correct in saying that the prints showed clear evidence of Guede coming to a stop well before the door and then turning round

 

[Dan O.]

Then let us turn around H 180 degrees and then compare the blood pattern with F.

Now that is really hard do decide. On the upper part of H, there are some blood traces which cannot be seen in F, so I tend to say that H is right print though I am not sure.

Greetings

What you are seeing on the upper part of H is another imprint. Y is perhaps the cleanest of the prints that has not been smeared by subsequent traffic. If you trace that one you should be able to overlay it on H and see where there are multiple steps with decreasing traces of blood being left behind.

 

[Dan O.]

D'oh I meant left! And I misremembered which print letters were which, but at least I was generally correct in saying that the prints showed clear evidence of Guede coming to a stop well before the door and then turning round

The tract Y is within reach of the door handle. But it is a streatch and I would expect a double imprint if Rudy had reached for the knob before turning around. The clean print at Y indicates to me that weight was not lifted from this shoe before Rudy reversed, pivoted on his right foot and planted the next left at H.

 

[Samson]

There is a discussion on PMF about phone calls, briefly the conclusions are from Jar,

1. Nencini ascribed the received Lumumba text and the reply to different towers, concluding she lied about receiving the message from inside Raffaele's place.
2. He ascribes the same tower for the received text for the calls she made to Filomena and the missing phones, but states she was inside his apartment.

This is contradictory, and surely shows the tower pinging was location dependent within his apartment, and Jar concludes saying

" On the contrary he categorically states that those calls all occurred whilst Knox was at Sollecito's. Sorry to say it but it appears pretty obvious that Nencini bungled this. He can't have it both ways."

Stilicho weighs in with

"I've never really found much of the cell phone evidence that compelling except for the timing of the calls on the morning the Postal Police surprised Stabby and Gabby at the cottage."

However Leila Schnepps has demolished this argument, from a guilter perspective, and of course IIP does anyway, but now MichaelB by an independent pathway shows that the postals were at the police station at 12 30 before getting lost for a substantial period on the way to the cottage, so arriving at 12 55 as Leila says, after Raffaele called the Carrabiniere is the only conclusion to hold water.

There go two big lies the prosecution have enjoyed exploiting, and argued by guilters.

Machiavelli, since you seem able to edit McCall's wikipedia, would you consider fixing these errors that are on a document promoted to the world's media by The Machine and others, or alternatively explain how Jar and Leila Schnepps have got these two substantial issues wrong.

 

[Diocletus]

There is a discussion on PMF about phone calls, briefly the conclusions are from Jar,

1. Nencini ascribed the received Lumumba text and the reply to different towers, concluding she lied about receiving the message from inside Raffaele's place.
2. He ascribes the same tower for the received text for the calls she made to Filomena and the missing phones, but states she was inside his apartment.

This is contradictory, and surely shows the tower pinging was location dependent within his apartment, and Jar concludes saying

" On the contrary he categorically states that those calls all occurred whilst Knox was at Sollecito's. Sorry to say it but it appears pretty obvious that Nencini bungled this. He can't have it both ways."

Stilicho weighs in with

"I've never really found much of the cell phone evidence that compelling except for the timing of the calls on the morning the Postal Police surprised Stabby and Gabby at the cottage."

However Leila Schnepps has demolished this argument, from a guilter perspective, and of course IIP does anyway, but now MichaelB by an independent pathway shows that the postals were at the police station at 12 30 before getting lost for a substantial period on the way to the cottage, so arriving at 12 55 as Leila says, after Raffaele called the Carrabiniere is the only conclusion to hold water.

There go two big lies the prosecution have enjoyed exploiting, and argued by guilters.

Machiavelli, since you seem able to edit McCall's wikipedia, would you consider fixing these errors that are on a document promoted to the world's media by The Machine and others, or alternatively explain how Jar and Leila Schnepps have got these two substantial issues wrong.

It seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Nencini tried to use his "finding" that Knox was not at Sollecito's to show Knox to be a liar and to corroborate Curatalo.

But the fact is, Nencini got the whole thing ass backwards, which basically just proves that he's a disingenuous jerk. I mean, really, how hard would it have been to figure out that this text came through the same tower that serviced Sollecito's place for numerous other calls?

 

[Machiavelli]

Yeah, there's just one problem: you seem not to know what the highlighted word means. Let me explain by example:

False: Stefanoni's testimony about 36b being "several hundred picograms", 165 having "abundant" DNA, and the footprints being blood.

True: Stefanoni's lab was contaminated, her machinery was defective, and she didn't produce all of the amplifications.

Stefanoni's statements were true, including her a posteriori estimation of probably some hundreds picograms (which she expressed only as personal and only probable estimation after pointing out that she could not tell, that she didn't have the datum and was her deduction in that moment when the defence was asking which one if it was more in the magnitude of picograms or in that of nanograms; and finally, that the datum happened to be correct).
Because based on later calculations abou the fluorimeter threshold it came out that it was, in fact, above 120-150 picograms.

And Stefanoni didn't provide any false information about footprints.

But these points are anyway unimportant. They don't change the problems of making false claims against Stefanoni. There are claims of lying, of manufacturing tests during secret sessions and of hiding and suppressing results. Those claims are false no matter how precise or complete the testimony of Stefanoni was. And those claims are what the pro-Knox who maintain them will have to prove.

 

[Kaosium]

Stefanoni's statements were true, including her a posteriori estimation of probably some hundreds picograms (which she expressed only as personal and only probable estimation after pointing out that she could not tell, that she didn't have the datum and was her deduction in that moment when the defence was asking which one if it was more in the magnitude of picograms or in that of nanograms; and finally, that the datum happened to be correct).
Because it was l, in fact, above 120-150 picograms.

Explain to me how you came to that conclusion. Real-Time PCR was not performed, so it was not quantified through that method. The Qubit gave a 'Too Low' so it was not quantified in that manner.

What information do you have that suggests to you the knife blade sample (36 B) was 120-150 pg?

 

[Machiavelli]

Well, yes. But unfortunately, due to incompetence, conceit, deceit, ignorance, stupidity, xenophobia and little brother syndrome, that's not what happened.

Nobody - I repeat: nobody - among the defence attorneys, or the Knox supporters, ever submitted such alleged "evidence" or even expressed such claims to any authority or judge.

Because the Knoxophiles have no intention to investigate anything. They are a bunch of lousy cowards. They are only good at screaming from far away, tgey can't act seriously, because they are just malicious liars; they know their evidence doesn't exist.

 

[Diocletus]

her a posteriori estimation of probably some hundreds picograms

If by "posteriori estimation" you mean an estimation that she pulled out of her ass, then yes, I agree.

 

[Numbers]

Stefanoni's statements were true, including her a posteriori estimation of probably some hundreds picograms (which she expressed only as personal and only probable estimation after pointing out that she could not tell, that she didn't have the datum and was her deduction in that moment when the defence was asking which one if it was more in the magnitude of picograms or in that of nanograms; and finally, that the datum happened to be correct).
Because based on later calculations abou the fluorimeter threshold it came out that it was, in fact, above 120-150 picograms.

...

Explain to me how you came to that conclusion. Real-Time PCR was not performed, so it was not quantified through that method. The Qubit gave a 'Too Low' so it was not quantified in that manner.

What information do you have that suggests to you the knife blade sample (36 B) was 120-150 pg?

How was the Qubit validated? Where is the documentation of that validation? How can one interpret the amount of DNA "measured" by a device that reports it can't measure the amount meaningfully (the result is "too low")?

That is fraud. It's no different in principle than a shopkeeper who must pay a sales tax or VAT intentionally misstating their receipts, or using a non-functioning sales (cash) register to avoid payment.

 

[Kaosium]

Nobody - I repeat: nobody - among the defence attorneys, or the Knox supporters, ever submitted such alleged "evidence" or even expressed such claims to any authority or judge.

Because the Knoxophiles have no intention to investigate anything. They are a bunch of lousy cowards. They are only good at screaming from far away, tgey can't act seriously, because they are just malicious liars; they know their evidence doesn't exist.

Like the evidence that the knife blade sample was 120-150 pgs doesn't exist? Here's my evidence, do you understand what it says?

Here's the bottom line:

Nor is it comprehensible, considering the negative results on sample B, what Dr. Stefanoni reported during the GUP questioning (page 178) where she stated that the DNA in sample B, quantified with Real Time PCR (it is recalled that such quantification as confirmed during the hearing was never carried out or, at least, no documentation was provided to support this claim), was “in the order of some hundreds of picograms”, a value which does not appear in any of the documents provided to us (SAL, Fluorimeter report, Real Time report, RTIGF).

(emphasis retained)

 

[js202]

Freud weeps from the beyond

Nobody - I repeat: nobody - among the defence attorneys, or the Knox supporters, ever submitted such alleged "evidence" or even expressed such claims to any authority or judge.

Because the Knoxophiles have no intention to investigate anything. They are a bunch of lousy cowards. They are only good at screaming from far away, tgey can't act seriously, because they are just malicious liars; they know their evidence doesn't exist.

Such a case of projection as yours has never been recorded in all the annals of psychiatry. Ground breaking stuff, your case study would have been up their with Dora and the Wolf Man, but you were born a century too late.

 

[Diocletus]

Nobody - I repeat: nobody - among the defence attorneys, or the Knox supporters, ever submitted such alleged "evidence" or even expressed such claims to any authority or judge.

Because the Knoxophiles have no intention to investigate anything. They are a bunch of lousy cowards. They are only good at screaming from far away, tgey can't act seriously, because they are just malicious liars; they know their evidence doesn't exist.

You mean like this non-existent evidence: http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/batch-two-kitchen-knife-36b-suppression-90-profiles/

You know, the showing of suppression, contamination and deceit that you have never been able to refute in any way, shape or form?

 

[Samson]

It seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Nencini tried to use his "finding" that Knox was not at Sollecito's to show Knox to be a liar and to corroborate Curatalo.

But the fact is, Nencini got the whole thing ass backwards, which basically just proves that he's a disingenuous jerk. I mean, really, how hard would it have been to figure out that this text came through the same tower that serviced Sollecito's place for numerous other calls?

Well, to wrap it up, that deplorably lazy analyst Skep concludes with

"One thing for certain is that Nencini has access to far more information and evidence than those criticizing him."

Anyone sponsoring a site aiding and abetting wrongful imprisonment has a solemn duty to support her statements with more than an abject default to "the infallibility of the pope judiciary."

 

[Machiavelli]

There is a discussion on PMF about phone calls, briefly the conclusions are from Jar,

1. Nencini ascribed the received Lumumba text and the reply to different towers, concluding she lied about receiving the message from inside Raffaele's place.
2. He ascribes the same tower for the received text for the calls she made to Filomena and the missing phones, but states she was inside his apartment.

This is contradictory, and surely shows the tower pinging was location dependent within his apartment, and Jar concludes saying

" On the contrary he categorically states that those calls all occurred whilst Knox was at Sollecito's. Sorry to say it but it appears pretty obvious that Nencini bungled this. He can't have it both ways."

Stilicho weighs in with

"I've never really found much of the cell phone evidence that compelling except for the timing of the calls on the morning the Postal Police surprised Stabby and Gabby at the cottage."

However Leila Schnepps has demolished this argument, from a guilter perspective, and of course IIP does anyway, but now MichaelB by an independent pathway shows that the postals were at the police station at 12 30 before getting lost for a substantial period on the way to the cottage, so arriving at 12 55 as Leila says, after Raffaele called the Carrabiniere is the only conclusion to hold water.

There go two big lies the prosecution have enjoyed exploiting, and argued by guilters.

Machiavelli, since you seem able to edit McCall's wikipedia, would you consider fixing these errors that are on a document promoted to the world's media by The Machine and others, or alternatively explain how Jar and Leila Schnepps have got these two substantial issues wrong.

I never edited the McCall Wikipedia page. I doubt my first edits will be correcting details along with the pro-Knox beliefs.

 

[Diocletus]

But these points are anyway unimportant. They don't change the problems of making false claims against Stefanoni. There are claims of lying, of manufacturing tests during secret sessions and of hiding and suppressing results. Those claims are false no matter how precise or complete the testimony of Stefanoni was. And those claims are what the pro-Knox who maintain them will have to prove.

Glad to retract the "secret tests" thing as soon as you can adequately explain why 36b was generated on a "-bis" plate with 90% missing profiles, and 165 was generated in a plate (no. 414) that postdates the applicable batch testing.