Continuation Part 18: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

What drugs? Are you suggesting the ICSI was able to find the DNA on a knife that tested negative for blood but were unable to determine through hair testing that the kids took drugs?

They were on drugs by their own account. Both Raff and Amanda put in writing, completely independently of each other, they would never smoke drugs again.

If the perps were not fuelled by drugs, it makes the murder worse, not better. It shows a sadistic psychopathology.

 

[Numbers]

My point related to either test. People have tried to estimate the size of the biological material that a technician would have seen by assuming that all the technician would have seen would have been the DNA. This isn't true obviously and when the DNA is extracted from blood it is even less true since the concentration of DNA in blood is low because the main component of blood, red cells, doesn't contain DNA at all.

As an aside, I mentioned that regardless of this discussion, my opinion is that there never was any Kercher DNA on the knife. I do think there was Sollecito DNA on the bra clasp however and I don't know how it got there. Obviously the PIP like to post the picture of Stefanoni's dirty gloves, and that should have precluded the use of the bra clasp results for use in a trial with a beyond a reasonable doubt criteria. Still I doubt that Sollecito's DNA got on the clasp through Stefanoni's dirty gloves unless she intentionally contaminated the gloves with something that she thought would have Sollecito DNA on it. For me, the clasp, is the single piece of evidence against Sollecito that can't be easily dismissed for one obvious reason or another. Of course, I don't think Sollecito's DNA got on the clasp during the murder of Kercher, but how it got there remains something of a mystery unless one assumes active evidence manipulation or an unlikely unintentional contamination event where Sollecito DNA was transferred to the clasp.

ETA: To expand a bit on why I doubt that Sollecito DNA ended up on the clasp from the gloves. There is DNA all over that room and there was undoubtedly some Sollecito DNA in the room, but the ratio of Sollecito DNA to non-Sollecito DNA would have been extremely small. The chance that a few Sollecito skin cells happened by chance to find their way to the clasp is minute when the non-Sollecito skin cells were so much more common in the room.

Interesting point about how the gloves might have been contaminated.

One possibility is that the Forensic Keystone cops touched the outer side of the door, which Sollecito had tried to break down. But the thing about contamination is that it is truly difficult to find the source. It could have happened in the lab. It could have been an intentional "spiking" of the test. And Stefanoni destroyed the remaining DNA on the bra clasps in storage, so there was no way to retest. That "accidental on purpose" destruction of the remaining evidence, using a storage method any tech should clearly know would destroy the remaining DNA, was one of the major factors that convinced me that there was "bad faith" aka fraudulent intent by the authorities in this case.

 

[Numbers]

From:
http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/BSU-professor-DNA-Amanda-Knox-297869731.html?tab=video&c=y

BOISE, Idaho (KBOI) - Boise State professor Greg Hampikian said he's relieved to see the Italian Supreme Court overturn the murder conviction of Amanda Knox. His DNA work helped free her the first time.

Hampikian contests that Italian Police set the bar too low for collecting DNA at the crime scene.

"This low amount of DNA that was used against Amanda which we have said all along was a spurious result," Hampikian said. "Probably contamination. Totally unreliable."

Hampikian proved there were issues with using such tiny amounts of DNA. He had grad students wear gloves to collect soda cans from staff members in the dean's office at Boise State University.

Wearing those same gloves, the students handled new steak knives. When they tested the knives using the same level of detection as Italian Police they found the staff's DNA on the weapons. Even though they had never touched them.

Hampikian said this case brought a serious worldwide debate within the forensics community.

"Amanda Knox's case brought great attention to the concept of what do we do with low template DNA," Hampikian said. "When there is very small amounts of DNA, and labs disagree on how to handle it."

Technology to test small amounts of DNA has greatly improved since the Knox case first began. Although Hampikian said it still requires careful collection of evidence to avoid contamination in the results.

 

[Vixen]

Where do you come up with this stuff

Instead of reading the party line, read the Bruno-Marasca report. I know cognitive dissonance is a high hurdle to clear, but far from Rudy being "The Lone Killer", Amanda did everything in her power to protect him.

Not looking good.

 

[Mr Fied]

Instead of reading the party line, read the Bruno-Marasca report. I know cognitive dissonance is a high hurdle to clear, but far from Rudy being "The Lone Killer", Amanda did everything in her power to protect him.

Not looking good.

Amanda and Raff not guilty, free to get on with their lives, looking good to me.

 

[Vixen]

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...hour_by_hour_guide_to_the_events_in_question/

Here's one more source, for luck.

 

[Grinder]

The approach is a useful one, however I'm not sure the quantitative result is valid. The sample size would have been damn small regardless and contamination through the air or by contact are obviously possible even if the size is substantially larger than what is suggested by what I think might be a flawed calculation.

Perhaps Planigale could give us the total weight of the sample size before the DNA was extracted.

The approach even if flawed vis-a-vis (sorry LJ don't have though accent marks handy) the total weight of the substance the DNA was found it still demonstrates how small a weight the DNA "found" was. I do believe the PGP refers to abundant DNA and not abundant stuff where the DNA was found.

Although your Grinder like behavior is globally appreciated, I still believe the approach is the best for showing people that the DNA found was easily transferred to the clasp and that it wasn't abundant in any conventional sense.

Perhaps Planigale or another DNA expert could give us some idea of weights before and after removing the carrying material.

Btw, are you sure Steff claimed to see anything except the striation on the knife?

 

[Grinder]

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...hour_by_hour_guide_to_the_events_in_question/

Here's one more source, for luck.

Michael is the same source that claims to have pictures of the bleach receipts from Nov. 2nd.

I would really like to see these texts or even the record of texting. If the record of texting is all that is available, I would like to see if the pattern was common on earlier dates.

 

[Desert Fox]

Instead of reading the party line, read the Bruno-Marasca report. I know cognitive dissonance is a high hurdle to clear, but far from Rudy being "The Lone Killer", Amanda did everything in her power to protect him.

Not looking good.

There is a very simple reason why Amanda and Raff cannot be involved. Meredeth's bedroom is not much larger than a large closet. Effectively, there is no way that there was a fight involving four people in that room without leaving considerable evidence of all of the actors involved.

To be honest, the case could end right there. The rest of the evidence of innocence is just gravy.

Amanda could have sex with the entire Perugia basketball team every night and it does not matter. What you were doing however is slut shaming. It is horrible and despicable.

 

[Grinder]

Here's Hodge's website - http://andrewghodges.flywheelsites.com/

 

[Kauffer]

In a normal forum, that is called a disagreement. You and your chums screaming LIAR is incredibly childish and even bullying. You cannot browbeat people into believing a spin is true.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...hour_by_hour_guide_to_the_events_in_question/

Here's one more source, for luck.

No. Post the messages. All you are doing is saying, "there are messages". Then, you're linking to secondary sources which say, "there are messages". But, the problem is that none of you have produced the messages. Simply saying "there are messages", doesn't mean they exist.

Post the messages! Where are they? Why are you being so obtuse?

 

[Vixen]

Michael is the same source that claims to have pictures of the bleach receipts from Nov. 2nd.

I would really like to see these texts or even the record of texting. If the record of texting is all that is available, I would like to see if the pattern was common on earlier dates.

TBH I have had a look at the police logs for Amanda (***590) and Mez (044***151);(***711) and I couldn't see there were any calls or sms' beyond those mentioned earlier between the pair 31.10.2007. Unless unanswered calls are not logged?

OK, fair enough, so it looks like Follain and Hodges are wrong.

 

[Vixen]

No. Post the messages. All you are doing is saying, "there are messages". Then, you're linking to secondary sources which say, "there are messages". But, the problem is that none of you have produced the messages. Simply saying "there are messages", doesn't mean they exist.

Post the messages! Where are they? Why are you being so obtuse?

OK, I've looked at actual police logs, and you're right. Balance swings.

ETA Link: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...:_Police_work#Perugia_police_phone_intercepts

 

[Vixen]

There is a very simple reason why Amanda and Raff cannot be involved. Meredeth's bedroom is not much larger than a large closet. Effectively, there is no way that there was a fight involving four people in that room without leaving considerable evidence of all of the actors involved.

To be honest, the case could end right there. The rest of the evidence of innocence is just gravy.

Amanda could have sex with the entire Perugia basketball team every night and it does not matter. What you were doing however is slut shaming. It is horrible and despicable.

That's a straw man. No-one cares a darn who she sleeps with.

There is ample room in Mez' room, especially if her arms are being held down.

 

[Kauffer]

TBH I have had a look at the police logs for Amanda (***590) and Mez (044***151);(***711) and I couldn't see there were any calls or sms' beyond those mentioned earlier between the pair 31.10.2007. Unless unanswered calls are not logged?

OK, fair enough, so it looks like Follain and Hodges are wrong.

OK, I've looked at actual police logs, and you're right. Balance swings.

ETA Link: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.c...:_Police_work#Perugia_police_phone_intercepts

Finally!

 

[Kauffer]

Error

Now that Vixen has admitted to an egregious error with regard to the Halloween text messages, might this now encourage her to check, meticulously, that the other claims she has made on this forum are true?

If you've made one mistake....

Now, go check.

 

[Ken Dine]

There is a problem with this analysis I believe. The DNA doesn't exist by itself. It is embedded in biological material. I don't think it is accurate to estimate the size of the material that somebody would see by assuming that they would only see the DNA. I made this argument previously and tried to get an estimate for how much biological material would have been mixed with the DNA. I don't remember the calculations now, but assuming the biological source was skin cells the total amount of biological material is much larger than the amount of DNA. If one assumes the biological source is blood then there is even much more biological material for a given amount of DNA then if the source is skin cells because red blood cells don't contain DNA.

I do not mean to argue in favor of the prosecution claims about the DNA on the knife. I think it is unlikely that any Kercher DNA was detected on the knife at all but I question the theory that there wasn't enough biological material on the knife to be observed by Stefanoni if the source was blood even with the small amount of DNA that was claimed to have been found. And of course, even if the calculated amount of biological material that would have been present is still too small to have been seen by Stefanoni, the possibility that the DNA was found mixed in with other detritus on the blade and that is what Stefanoni saw.

The salt comparison makes me woozy. LCN/DNA needs at least 3 human cells (more is better) to work, and Stefanoni obviously didn't even have 3 human cells to work with on the knife.

Also, since LCN-DNA involves so few cells which often can't be identified as to the type of tissue they came from, transfer is always a problem since there may be numerous reasons why so few cells can find their way into a crime scene, and if you can't even specify the tissue type that the DNA came from, then what good is such specious evidence?

 

[LondonJohn]

I am more than happy to engage in honest debate/argument with anyone who holds opposing views on the Knox/Sollecito trials to mine. I am in fact very keen to have my opinions/conclusions challenged and questioned - that's one of the better ways to learn and advance. But when people more-or-less constantly engage in the invention, distortion and/or misrepresentation of factual evidence/testimony to support their argument, and/or when people deal the sanctimonious-moral-high-ground card from the bottom of the deck, it doesn't take me long to lose the will to engage: it's a total waste of time and effort.

Now, if someone can represent to me how all the available evidence* - and the lack of evidence - even indicates the participation of Knox and/or Sollecito in the murder (let alone prove it beyond a reasonable doubt), then I'll be happy to debate in good faith. I think many pro-innocence/pro-acquittal commentators here feel the same way. But I'm/we're still waiting though, alas......

* That is to say: reliable, credible, robust, admissible evidence. Though again, I would welcome anyone having an honest debate about whether or not things like the DNA evidence in this case or the bathmat print evidence, or pretty much all the evidence gathered from the small bathroom, or the Knox "confession/accusation" and its follow-ups, or Curatolo's testimony, or Quintavalle's testimony, or Capezzali's testimony, or Monacchia's testimony, or "evidence" showing that the break-in was staged......... is reliable, credible, robust, admissible evidence/testimony. I believe there's more than enough reason to conclude that all of the above is - for one of a variety of reasons - fundamentally unreliable and thus of no probative value. But if anyone wants to argue otherwise - while retaining intellectual honesty and supporting data/scientific understanding/legal understanding - then I'm all ears.

 

[Bill Williams]

I am more than happy to engage in honest debate/argument with anyone who holds opposing views on the Knox/Sollecito trials to mine. I am in fact very keen to have my opinions/conclusions challenged and questioned - that's one of the better ways to learn and advance. But when people more-or-less constantly engage in the invention, distortion and/or misrepresentation of factual evidence/testimony to support their argument, and/or when people deal the sanctimonious-moral-high-ground card from the bottom of the deck, it doesn't take me long to lose the will to engage: it's a total waste of time and effort.

Now, if someone can represent to me how all the available evidence* - and the lack of evidence - even indicates the participation of Knox and/or Sollecito in the murder (let alone prove it beyond a reasonable doubt), then I'll be happy to debate in good faith. I think many pro-innocence/pro-acquittal commentators here feel the same way. But I'm/we're still waiting though, alas......

* That is to say: reliable, credible, robust, admissible evidence. Though again, I would welcome anyone having an honest debate about whether or not things like the DNA evidence in this case or the bathmat print evidence, or pretty much all the evidence gathered from the small bathroom, or the Knox "confession/accusation" and its follow-ups, or Curatolo's testimony, or Quintavalle's testimony, or Capezzali's testimony, or Monacchia's testimony, or "evidence" showing that the break-in was staged......... is reliable, credible, robust, admissible evidence/testimony. I believe there's more than enough reason to conclude that all of the above is - for one of a variety of reasons - fundamentally unreliable and thus of no probative value. But if anyone wants to argue otherwise - while retaining intellectual honesty and supporting data/scientific understanding/legal understanding - then I'm all ears.

You are very stubborn. You insist on an evidence-based view of this, rather than a hypothesis-based view.

The alternative is to seek the professional-spiritual services of js202. But don't sign on for the thigh-cincher. Trust me.

 

[MichaelB]

The Marasca-Bruno Report translated to English.

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Marasca-Bruno-Motivations-Report.pdf