Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Bill Williams]

The OGGI case acquittal was to do with Narducci (_sp?) and the Monster of Florence case.

Thanks for the clarification. I'd assumed it was the defamation Mignini brought for Oggi reprinting parts of Knox's book.

 

[Stacyhs]

Thanks for the clarification. I'd assumed it was the defamation Mignini brought for Oggi reprinting parts of Knox's book.

Poor Giuliano. He hasn't been doing too well lately with all his lawsuits.

The Oggi acquittal was in reference to the Narducci case but Vogt did reference #AK which is rather misleading.

 

[Planigale]

Perhaps this news is stale, but it was new to me:

Andrea Vogt reports that Oggi magazine has been cleared in the defamation case brought against it. Starting with the March 2015 acquittals, the people who brought this prosecution - including the predatory side-prosecutions - have pretty much lost everything since.

The problem is it is not even internally consistent. The very clear DNA from Knox on the knife handle is attributed to epithelials from her holding the knife. The very low level DNA from the blade swab is attributed to be MK blood. The DNA from the bra hook is epithelial although this is a clear result. The DNA from the cigarette was clear but is attributed to saliva. If all that was needed was a clear result then the sample from the blade is not blood and that from the handle is but of knox. Yet there was no detectable blood on the knife, and the blood detection test will pick up blood at a level when DNA cannot be detected. So this does not make sense, A clear DNA result means blood, at a level where there was visible blood elsewhere, but not even invisible blood was detected on the knife. In maths this is called reductio ad absurd. The consequence of the assumption results in an illogical conclusion. In science this is called an experiment to disprove the hypothesis.

 

[Desert Fox]

In the US at least, one has to argue before the court before the actual trial that the science is actually valid.

Is there anything like that in Italy?

 

[Vixen]

The problem is it is not even internally consistent. The very clear DNA from Knox on the knife handle is attributed to epithelials from her holding the knife. The very low level DNA from the blade swab is attributed to be MK blood. The DNA from the bra hook is epithelial although this is a clear result. The DNA from the cigarette was clear but is attributed to saliva. If all that was needed was a clear result then the sample from the blade is not blood and that from the handle is but of knox. Yet there was no detectable blood on the knife, and the blood detection test will pick up blood at a level when DNA cannot be detected. So this does not make sense, A clear DNA result means blood, at a level where there was visible blood elsewhere, but not even invisible blood was detected on the knife. In maths this is called reductio ad absurd. The consequence of the assumption results in an illogical conclusion. In science this is called an experiment to disprove the hypothesis.

No, the matter on the blade came from twelve human samples of tissue Stefanoni retrieved from knife striations. Only one was of sufficient quality to produce a near full profile (15 alleles : legal standard UK =10) of the murder victim, Mez.

Your claim that we must prove it was from blood and no other type of human tissue or matter is a red herring.

In any case, Raff had an explanation for any DNA of the victim they might find on it: he once pricked the back of Mez' hand whilst cooking in his flat.

Alas, Amanda had already told police Mez had never been there. Whoops! Another lie.

 

[acbytesla]

No, the matter on the blade came from twelve human samples of tissue Stefanoni retrieved from knife striations. Only one was of sufficient quality to produce a near full profile (15 alleles : legal standard UK =10) of the murder victim, Mez.

Your claim that we must prove it was from blood and no other type of human tissue or matter is a red herring.

In any case, Raff had an explanation for any DNA of the victim they might find on it: he once pricked the back of Mez' hand whilst cooking in his flat.

Alas, Amanda had already told police Mez had never been there. Whoops! Another lie.

We don't actually know any of this as Stefanoni violates the number 1 tenet of Science and that being testability. No one including Stefanoni could reproduce her results. When one considers this in combination with her lack of transparent work process makes the test results are dubious at best.

 

[Planigale]

No, the matter on the blade came from twelve human samples of tissue Stefanoni retrieved from knife striations. Only one was of sufficient quality to produce a near full profile (15 alleles : legal standard UK =10) of the murder victim, Mez.

Your claim that we must prove it was from blood and no other type of human tissue or matter is a red herring.

In any case, Raff had an explanation for any DNA of the victim they might find on it: he once pricked the back of Mez' hand whilst cooking in his flat.

Alas, Amanda had already told police Mez had never been there. Whoops! Another lie.

Just where is this from? Certainly not anything presented in court. Do you not see the logical inconsistency in what you write? If only one sample was of sufficient quality to test for DNA how does one know the other samples were human (after all there is all that unexplained cat blood and we know psychopaths often start on animals!). Since we know the results of the microscopy exam found only cellular material near the hilt (subsequently shown to be starch granules from flour), how were these 12 pieces of tissue identified? This is the greatest flight of fantasy you have presented so far. Do you have no limits on making stuff up?

 

[Stacyhs]

No, the matter on the blade came from twelve human samples of tissue Stefanoni retrieved from knife striations. Only one was of sufficient quality to produce a near full profile (15 alleles : legal standard UK =10) of the murder victim, Mez.

Your claim that we must prove it was from blood and no other type of human tissue or matter is a red herring.

In any case, Raff had an explanation for any DNA of the victim they might find on it: he once pricked the back of Mez' hand whilst cooking in his flat.

Alas, Amanda had already told police Mez had never been there. Whoops! Another lie.

Please cite your source for this claim.

Speaking of red herrings, bringing up Raffaele's "pricked the back of Mez' hand" story is exactly that as he later explained that he "imagined" the incident in his panic to understand how Meredith's DNA could have been deposited on his kitchen knife. He wrote that something similar had happened at the via della Pergola kitchen when he had made the girls lunch. Panic induced imaginings are not "lies". Alas, no blood of any kind, much less Meredith's, was found on the knife. Nor was her DNA.

I asked you yesterday to "Please provide Amanda's quote and cite the source of the bathroom being cleaned the day before." Still waiting.....

 

[NotEvenWrong]

I believe you guys are misunderstanding Vixen. If the twelve samples on the knife were human, then that increases the chances Amanda is guilty. Therefore, since we know Amanda is guilty and Vixen's fundamental assumption of all of reality is that Amanda is guilty, the twelve samples must have been from Meredith! In fact, there is probably a citation in a tabloid somewhere circa 2008. No need for any actual thought or further research. In fact, forensic science journals are to be avoided -- you don't want to be corrupted by pagan witchcraft.

 

[andreajo]

I believe you guys are misunderstanding Vixen. If the twelve samples on the knife were human, then that increases the chances Amanda is guilty. Therefore, since we know Amanda is guilty and Vixen's fundamental assumption of all of reality is that Amanda is guilty, the twelve samples must have been from Meredith! In fact, there is probably a citation in a tabloid somewhere circa 2008. No need for any actual thought or further research. In fact, forensic science journals are to be avoided -- you don't want to be corrupted by pagan witchcraft.

Eeeeexactly. Just use your common sense!

 

[TruthCalls]

No, the matter on the blade came from twelve human samples of tissue Stefanoni retrieved from knife striations. Only one was of sufficient quality to produce a near full profile (15 alleles : legal standard UK =10) of the murder victim, Mez.

Your claim that we must prove it was from blood and no other type of human tissue or matter is a red herring.

In any case, Raff had an explanation for any DNA of the victim they might find on it: he once pricked the back of Mez' hand whilst cooking in his flat.

Alas, Amanda had already told police Mez had never been there. Whoops! Another lie.

Apparently you are forgetting those samples tested negative for human species using an antibody test. Samples 36B and 36C tested identical with three separate tests proving there was nothing there. No explanation from Stefanoni why she recorded 36B positive for human DNA when none was detected during quantification, nor did she ever explain why she chose to amplify a sample that scientifically contained nothing to amplify.

The real red herring here is making an issue of whether something was blood or not when there is undeniable evidence that there was no human biological material on the blade, making the issue moot.

 

[Numbers]

Apparently you are forgetting those samples tested negative for human species using an antibody test. Samples 36B and 36C tested identical with three separate tests proving there was nothing there. No explanation from Stefanoni why she recorded 36B positive for human DNA when none was detected during quantification, nor did she ever explain why she chose to amplify a sample that scientifically contained nothing to amplify.

The real red herring here is making an issue of whether something was blood or not when there is undeniable evidence that there was no human biological material on the blade, making the issue moot.

Stefanoni's lab results, in as much as she presented them - much of the data, including the raw electronic data, was suppressed by Stefanoni and the prosecution - showed that several control samples were contaminated by DNA during the testing for this case. This means that the low level of DNA allegedly detected by PCR on the knife blade, and which could not be detected or quantified by the Qubit quantification method, cannot be assumed to have been present on the knife blade. The fact that Stefanoni admitted that she could not detect any blood whatsoever on the knife blade reinforces the conclusion that there was no DNA present on the knife blade. Nor was there any objective evidence of any other human tissue on the knife blade. The independent court experts assigned by the Hellmann court did detect starch from plants on the knife blade, consistent with its use to prepare food in Sollecito's kitchen.

Details of the DNA contamination, as determined from an examination of the limited data Stefanoni and the prosecution allowed into court and provided to the defense, are shown in:

http://www.amandaknoxcase.com/contamination-labwork-coverup/

Here is an excerpt:

The lab records that were withheld until half way through the trial demonstrate at least two instances of laboratory contamination in negative controls. These contamination events were random, low-quantity contaminations in the Real Time PCR process. Moreover, the records show that Patrizia Stefanoni knew about the contamination and reacted to it, but nevertheless, she gave testimony that wrongly convinced the courts that her laboratory was contamination-free. To the contrary, however, the laboratory’s own records demonstrate that the laboratory was susceptible to exactly the kind of contamination that would have generated the profiles attributed to the kitchen knife (Rep. 36b) and bra clasp (Rep. 165).

 

[Vixen]

Amanda confirmed to Mignini the bathroom had been cleaned the day before. It is obvious in a multiple occupancy, you'd need to clean it over regularly with something that kills off bacteria (bleach or disinfectant).

You misunderstand what Garafano and Stefanoni were saying. Whilst spermatozoa and saliva might iu for iu contain higher concentrations of DNA than blood as a whole, including the red blood cells when we look at the rfu peaks of the DNA analysis of the bathroom DNA, we realise that Amanda's DNA presence mixed in with Mez blood is higher than that of Mez'. The only part of blood that is nucleated are the white blood cells, which are indeed amongst the richest sources of DNA. When we look at the amount of Amanda's DNA found, she would have had to have been spitting huge volumes (and even then, what was her DNA mixed with Mez' spilled blood on Filomena's floor doing there?).

it really matters not a jot whether the DNA came from her pierced ear, spat out toothpaste and saliva or some kind of hermaphroditic spermatozoa (that would be medical history), fact is, we can reject spermatozoa as the source of Amanda's DNA (hullo?) and common sense tells us the voluminous level of Amanda's DNA (>than Mez' who bled profusely) almost certainly came from her white blood cells, and even if it didn't, it establishes scientifically, at least, that Amanda was present in person during the time Mez was dying, or within about half an hour. Yet she failed to report the accident at all.

We note there is no sign of Rudy in the small bathroom nor in the room you claim he burgled, using super rock climbing expertise.[/QUOTE]


Please provide Amanda's quote and cite the source of the bathroom being cleaned the day before. I believe you are getting this from TMOMK which claims that "Amanda testified that the bathroom was clean the day before the murder." Amanda said no such thing. When asked if her blood was on the faucet the day before, she said "no". She did not say the bathroom was cleaned. It is quite possible that Amanda simply had not noticed the droplets on the faucet the day before.

As for "Mez's spilled blood" on Filomena's floor, what part of TMB negative for blood are you not understanding? It was simply DNA that was mixed, not blood. Neither was the other floor sample blood that had only Meredith's DNA.

"Almost certainly" according to whom? Not Stefanoni, nor any other expert who testified. When Amanda's DNA became mixed with Meredith's blood cannot be determined according to expert testimony. The mixing could have occurred when the sample was improperly taken as more than one place was swabbed with the same piece of gauze.

No sign of Rudy unless you count his bloody footprint on the mat. It belongs to the killer. Vinci ruled out Sollecito. Then there's also Meredith's blood smear on the light switch that yielded no DNA of who put it there. It wasn't Meredith. Guede admits he went into the bathroom twice.

Now you've decided that someone has to be have "super rock climbing expertise" to climb into that window. Yet an actual expert climber, when asked if it would take an experienced climber to access the window, responded it would be easy "not only for me, for another person it would be no problem."
Please remind me exactly how Guede managed to get into the law office just a couple weeks earlier? The one that was actually higher off the ground than Filomena's window. And please, don't tell me he didn't break into that office but only bought the stolen items.

Firstly, the footprint on the bathmat is 'not at all compatible' with Rudy orr Amanda. Each person has a unique footprint.

Secondly, the bathroom having been cleaned is something Amanda confirmed to Mignini in her interview with him.


Lastly, there is no evidence at all Rudy broke into the lawyers office for reasons stated. Even the lawyers said it was an inside job of someone looking for data. I dare say Rudy mixed with the local mob, but even Amanda slept with one of them in a one-night stand.

If the climb is so easy-peasy, why did FOA have to pay a professional rock climber to do it? Why not anybody in the street. Like this guy, perhaps

 

[Vixen]

Apparently you are forgetting those samples tested negative for human species using an antibody test. Samples 36B and 36C tested identical with three separate tests proving there was nothing there. No explanation from Stefanoni why she recorded 36B positive for human DNA when none was detected during quantification, nor did she ever explain why she chose to amplify a sample that scientifically contained nothing to amplify.

The real red herring here is making an issue of whether something was blood or not when there is undeniable evidence that there was no human biological material on the blade, making the issue moot.

Says who? Vecchiotti and Conti, who claimed sample 36(i) was 'rye starch' IIRC? Tried to bury the evidence, when it was Amanda's DNA all along.

The defense forensic scientist representatives were there (or ought to have been, but we do know for sure one turned up, representing Raff's team) when Stefanoni carried out the testing. The defense on all sides have agreed without challenge that the DNA on the knife did indeed yield a near perfect profile of Mez.

When the knife was seized, both Raff and Amanda expressed anxiety about what would be found. Raff even tried to preclude the findings by saying the reason any Mez DNA might be found would be because he 'pricked the back of her hand whilst cooking' in a private letter to Papa Raff, and in an intercepted conversation between Amanda and her mother, she expresses concern about the find.

As you know, there were superficial knife flicks found on Mez' hands and arms, as though she had been goaded by her assailants.

Blood washes away easily from stainless steel if rinsed promptly. However, tissue can still remain in scratches and grooves, and this is where Mez body tissue was recovered.

The PCR analysis of the genetic material is all done by machine. Perhaps you would care to explain how Stefanoni was able to fake a machine reading of the various loci and peaks, which is a series of scientific data. As there were 15 alleles that matched Mez', to get that result at random would be like winning the lottery three times over, at odds of winning being apx 14million to one to just win it once.

The DNA sequence on the bra clasp was >3 billion to one against it not being Raff's, a particularly strong profile.

The correct questions you should be asking are: what was Raff's DNA doing on Mez' bra clasp, what was Mez' DNA doing on the knife blade, with Amanda's on the hilt? What were Raff's and Amanda's bare footprints in blood (or turnip juice, if you prefer) doing at the murder scene, as scientifically and objectively highlighted by luminol?

You have failed to provide a motive as to why the entire police force and forensic team of Italy, numbering hundreds of well-educated and trained staff, would collude together to frame some preppy wimp and his brash 'drugged up tart' (to quote Mez, according to Rudy)?

As your lot keep pointing out, yourselves, 'police have got the black guy' .

Unless of course <sfx sound of penny dropping> ...

 

[Mr Fied]

Says who? Vecchiotti and Conti, who claimed sample 36(i) was 'rye starch' IIRC? Tried to bury the evidence, when it was Amanda's DNA all along.

The defense forensic scientist representatives were there (or ought to have been, but we do know for sure one turned up, representing Raff's team) when Stefanoni carried out the testing. The defense on all sides have agreed without challenge that the DNA on the knife did indeed yield a near perfect profile of Mez.

When the knife was seized, both Raff and Amanda expressed anxiety about what would be found. Raff even tried to preclude the findings by saying the reason any Mez DNA might be found would be because he 'pricked the back of her hand whilst cooking' in a private letter to Papa Raff, and in an intercepted conversation between Amanda and her mother, she expresses concern about the find.

As you know, there were superficial knife flicks found on Mez' hands and arms, as though she had been goaded by her assailants.

Blood washes away easily from stainless steel if rinsed promptly. However, tissue can still remain in scratches and grooves, and this is where Mez body tissue was recovered.

The PCR analysis of the genetic material is all done by machine. Perhaps you would care to explain how Stefanoni was able to fake a machine reading of the various loci and peaks, which is a series of scientific data. As there were 15 alleles that matched Mez', to get that result at random would be like winning the lottery three times over, at odds of winning being apx 14million to one to just win it once.

The DNA sequence on the bra clasp was >3 billion to one against it not being Raff's, a particularly strong profile.

The correct questions you should be asking are: what was Raff's DNA doing on Mez' bra clasp, what was Mez' DNA doing on the knife blade, with Amanda's on the hilt? What were Raff's and Amanda's bare footprints in blood (or turnip juice, if you prefer) doing at the murder scene, as scientifically and objectively highlighted by luminol?
You have failed to provide a motive as to why the entire police force and forensic team of Italy, numbering hundreds of well-educated and trained staff, would collude together to frame some preppy wimp and his brash 'drugged up tart' (to quote Mez, according to Rudy)?

As your lot keep pointing out, yourselves, 'police have got the black guy' .

Unless of course <sfx sound of penny dropping> ...

The correct answers, in order are:
It wasn't. Cannot be proven.
It wasn't. Cannot be proven.
She had used the knife at Raff's. Was retested, confirmed to be AK. IIRC.
They were not. No bare footprints proven to be from AK and RS were found.

 

[andreajo]

Firstly, the footprint on the bathmat is 'not at all compatible' with Rudy orr Amanda. Each person has a unique footprint.

Secondly, the bathroom having been cleaned is something Amanda confirmed to Mignini in her interview with him.


Lastly, there is no evidence at all Rudy broke into the lawyers office for reasons stated. Even the lawyers said it was an inside job of someone looking for data. I dare say Rudy mixed with the local mob, but even Amanda slept with one of them in a one-night stand.

If the climb is so easy-peasy, why did FOA have to pay a professional rock climber to do it? Why not anybody in the street. Like this guy, perhaps

Sure, everyone has a unique footprint. Do experts recommend making comparisons using photographs of half foot tracks recorded in diluted blood on a fluffy bathmat for definitive to-the-millimetre precision and accuracy?

 

[Bill Williams]

Says who? Vecchiotti and Conti, who claimed sample 36(i) was 'rye starch' IIRC? Tried to bury the evidence, when it was Amanda's DNA all along.

Then you are now claiming that C&V were hostile to the defence. 36I being Amanda's vindicates her innocence; and you're now claiming that C&V purposely hid something to that effect.

When the knife was seized, both Raff and Amanda expressed anxiety about what would be found. Raff even tried to preclude the findings by saying the reason any Mez DNA might be found would be because he 'pricked the back of her hand whilst cooking' in a private letter to Papa Raff, and in an intercepted conversation between Amanda and her mother, she expresses concern about the find.

Of course they were concerned. By that time they were concerned that evidence was going to be manufactured against them. Which is perhaps true.

Blood washes away easily from stainless steel if rinsed promptly. However, tissue can still remain in scratches and grooves, and this is where Mez body tissue was recovered.

The only person in the history of this case to see the striation Stefanoni claimed contained 36B was Stefanoni. Other examiners of the knife could not find it. When asked why she did not photograph the knife-striation, she said it was not photographable - at least that's what Judge Massei writes in is 2010 (6 years ago!) motivations report.

The PCR analysis of the genetic material is all done by machine. Perhaps you would care to explain how Stefanoni was able to fake a machine reading of the various loci and peaks, which is a series of scientific data. As there were 15 alleles that matched Mez', to get that result at random would be like winning the lottery three times over, at odds of winning being apx 14million to one to just win it once.

Unless it was blood, then that sample, real or imagined, is irrelevant to the crime.

The DNA sequence on the bra clasp was >3 billion to one against it not being Raff's, a particularly strong profile.

That sample in the clasp also contained DNA from at least three other male contributors. All of this was in a single sample where the majority of it was the victim's. The issue is - how did three male contributors get onto the clasp?

The correct questions you should be asking are: what was Raff's DNA doing on Mez' bra clasp, /quote]
Ah, er, no.... the correct question is not a suspect-centred one. If one is after the truth one asks how did the three other male contributors get there?

You have failed to provide a motive as to why the entire police force and forensic team of Italy, numbering hundreds of well-educated and trained staff, would collude together to frame some preppy wimp and his brash 'drugged up tart' (to quote Mez, according to Rudy)?

As your lot keep pointing out, yourselves, 'police have got the black guy' . Unless of course <sfx sound of penny dropping> ...

That is a guilter strawman. The ONLY people I've ever heard make this a racial issuse are guilters (poor, poor Rudy).

You have failed to provide evidence of of motive for RS and/or AK to have been involved in this crime. And please - do not quote Darkness Descending... so far you've only provided page numbers and when looked-up, that page doesn't refer to what you claim.

Yet your personal PR offensive enters its 14th month.

 

[TruthCalls]

Says who? Vecchiotti and Conti, who claimed sample 36(i) was 'rye starch' IIRC? Tried to bury the evidence, when it was Amanda's DNA all along.

The defense forensic scientist representatives were there (or ought to have been, but we do know for sure one turned up, representing Raff's team) when Stefanoni carried out the testing. The defense on all sides have agreed without challenge that the DNA on the knife did indeed yield a near perfect profile of Mez.

When the knife was seized, both Raff and Amanda expressed anxiety about what would be found. Raff even tried to preclude the findings by saying the reason any Mez DNA might be found would be because he 'pricked the back of her hand whilst cooking' in a private letter to Papa Raff, and in an intercepted conversation between Amanda and her mother, she expresses concern about the find.

As you know, there were superficial knife flicks found on Mez' hands and arms, as though she had been goaded by her assailants.

Blood washes away easily from stainless steel if rinsed promptly. However, tissue can still remain in scratches and grooves, and this is where Mez body tissue was recovered.

The PCR analysis of the genetic material is all done by machine. Perhaps you would care to explain how Stefanoni was able to fake a machine reading of the various loci and peaks, which is a series of scientific data. As there were 15 alleles that matched Mez', to get that result at random would be like winning the lottery three times over, at odds of winning being apx 14million to one to just win it once.

The DNA sequence on the bra clasp was >3 billion to one against it not being Raff's, a particularly strong profile.

The correct questions you should be asking are: what was Raff's DNA doing on Mez' bra clasp, what was Mez' DNA doing on the knife blade, with Amanda's on the hilt? What were Raff's and Amanda's bare footprints in blood (or turnip juice, if you prefer) doing at the murder scene, as scientifically and objectively highlighted by luminol?

You have failed to provide a motive as to why the entire police force and forensic team of Italy, numbering hundreds of well-educated and trained staff, would collude together to frame some preppy wimp and his brash 'drugged up tart' (to quote Mez, according to Rudy)?

As your lot keep pointing out, yourselves, 'police have got the black guy' .

Unless of course <sfx sound of penny dropping> ...

Talk about red herrings....

Says who? How about Stefanoni. If you bothered to read the reports submitted by Stefanoni you would have seen all of these tests were run and were all negative. And to make things easy for you, why not head to one of your own 'trusted sites', the fake wiki, and download the spreadsheet they pulled together. Despite their best effort to mislead (they coded "?Yes" for DNA quantified when we KNOW all she ever got was "Too Low") the record shows no blood (TMB) and no human biological material (human antibody). Instead of repeating talking points and biased POV's, why not do some real research and see what the science showed.

Spouting the odds of an egram not matching someone is moot if the evidence proves the egram is the result of contamination. It's not faking results, it's called contamination and it's been proven her lab experienced it during her testing for this case.

So funny how for years we've heard about Raffaele's place smelling of bleach and how the knife was unusually clean, but now you want to argue human tissue (scientifically proven not to be there, but now I digress..) on the front half of the blade was not removed during this intense cleaning. I wish you guys would make up your mind how the clean-up went down.

History is littered with police and prosecution teams getting tunnel vision on a suspect and not being able to properly prosecute the case as a result. Why don't you explain why Stefanoni opted to amplify a sample that, by way of three separate and definitive scientific tests, proved the sample was not blood, was not human and did not contain DNA. I'll give you MY opinion... Stefanoni was desperately trying to find something to tie Amanda and Raffaele to the crime. The same could be said for how a bra clasp sat for 47 days in the middle of the murder room floor and went uncollected, but when absolutely nothing could link Raffaele to the scene the police return and collect it and then, as if by magic, there's an LCN trace of Raffaele. Or how samples lit by Luminol but negative for blood (TMB) and negative for Meredith's DNA can still be argued as being made from Meredith's blood. You can keep your blinders on - after this much time it's clear you have no interest in removing them - but you should at least keep in mind open minded people don't wear those blinders and these are very obvious reasons for why Amanda and Raffaele were correctly acquitted. To continue to ignore definitive, non-ambiguous scientific evidence while throwing out one red herring after another is disingenuous at best.

As for your repeated effort to use the race card... let's just say that's as classless as it is ignorant.

 

[Desert Fox]

That is a guilter strawman. The ONLY people I've ever heard make this a racial issuse are guilters (poor, poor Rudy).

That is all they have

 

[Stacyhs]

Firstly, the footprint on the bathmat is 'not at all compatible' with Rudy or Amanda. Each person has a unique footprint.
No one has ever claimed it was Amanda's foot. It is "not at all compatible" with Guede only according to the prosecution experts who incorrectly measured the big toe by several mm and worked only from pictures of the mat. Prof. Vinci, who worked with the mat itself, identified the error in measuring and excluded Sollecito. Marasca Bruno never mentions the bathmat footprint so did not accept it as belonging to Sollecito.

Secondly, the bathroom having been cleaned is something Amanda confirmed to Mignini in her interview with him.

So you claim. But you, once again, fail to provide any quotes or citations proving said claim. For the third time, please provide the quote where Amanda states the bathroom was cleaned the day before and a link to it.


Lastly, there is no evidence at all Rudy broke into the lawyers office for reasons stated. Even the lawyers said it was an inside job of someone looking for data. I dare say Rudy mixed with the local mob, but even Amanda slept with one of them in a one-night stand.

Guede was convicted of receiving the stolen property from the law office. After the passage of several years, the police could not prove he had done the actual break-in. I guess it's just a strange coincidence that the method of that break-in was virtually identical to the break-in at Via della Pergola just 2 weeks later? They had these in common: second story (law office 3 ft higher off ground), rock thrown through window, wall scaled, grate below window, the burglar helped himself to a drink from the refrigerator, clothes tossed onto the floor, cell phone stolen.

What lawyers said it was "an inside job of someone looking for data"? I just read the testimony of Paolo Brocchi and he made no mention of any such thing.

No, dear. Amanda did not sleep with anyone involved with the Mafia. I assume you are referring to the man in Florence who was later found to be a drug dealer? She never "slept with"/had intercourse with him. That's why he wasn't included in her list of men she'd had sex with in her prison diary.



[/COLOR]

If the climb is so easy-peasy, why did FOA have to pay a professional rock climber to do it? Why not anybody in the street. Like this guy, perhaps

l

FOA did not pay anyone, so there's lie #1. The video of the rock climber is from a program produced by the UK's Channel 5. The climber, Ricardo Panella, is identified as "a climbing enthusiast" and "experienced" not as a "professional". Lie #2.
When Panella is asked if the climb requires an experienced climber, or only someone who is tall, athletic, and in reasonably good shape, he answers that it is not a problem "not only for me, for another person, it's not a problem to climb".