Continuation Part 21: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Numbers]

This is to provide some more information on how civil cases interact with criminal cases in Itay.

The CPP (Italian Code of Criminal Procedure) deals with Civil issues for the Civil Party affected by a crime in Book I, Title V, Civil Party, Person with Civil Liability for damages and person with Civil Liability for financial penalties.

Articles within Book I, Title V are CPP Articles 74 through 89. Articles 74 and 75 seem of particular relevance.

CPP Article 74 Entitlement to civil action
1. The person who suffers harm as a result of the offense or his heirs may bring a civil action before the judge in the criminal proceedings for restitution and compensation for damage as referred to in Article 185 of the Criminal Code against the accused and the person with civil liability for damages.

CPP Article 75 Relations between civil action and criminal prosecution
1. A civil action brought before the civil judge may be transferred to criminal proceedings if, in the civil court, a judgment on the merits of the case has not been issued, even if the judgment has not become final. The exercise of this right shall entail the waiver of the acts of the civil trial; the criminal judge shall also decide on the costs of civil proceedings.

2. The civil action shall be carried out in civil court if it is not transferred to criminal proceedings or if it was initiated when it was no longer possible to join the criminal proceedings as a civil party.

3. If the action is brought against the accused in a civil court after joining the criminal proceedings as a civil party or after a judgment of first instance is issued, civil proceedings shall be suspended until the delivery of a final criminal judgment, without prejudice to the exceptions provided for by law.

The above articles appear to mean that the civil party can't have a civil trial against the accused in a civil court while also pursuing the civil case in the criminal court, and that the civil case in the criminal court would take precedence until the final judgment of the criminal proceedings is delivered.

Once the final judgment of the criminal proceedings is delivered, in the case of a final acquittal, the provisions of CPP Articles 652 and 654 would appear to take effect: the final acquittal has binding effect on the civil action, for damages as long as the specification of the acquittal was "the accused did not commit the act" (or some of the other specifications) [Article 652] and no new civil action could be started for any final acquittal or final conviction [Article 654], as long as the civil action had been joined to the criminal proceedings.

The only way around these provisions would seem to be if the civil action is never joined to the criminal proceedings. However, in the Knox - Sollecito case, the Kerchers and others did join their civil actions to the criminal proceedings. So, according to the provisions of the CPP, no new civil action against Knox or Sollecito for any alleged act covered by the final judgments of the courts is possible.

 

[bagels]

Only problem is, the other allelles are Rudy's and Amanda's. So, Rudy's is accurate, but Amanda's is "contamination"? Why is Raff throwing Amanda under the bus by publicising her presence?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-bloody-bra-claim-ex-boyfriends-lawyers.html

If Stef, C&V, and David Balding didn't find Amanda's DNA on the bra, it probably wasn't there.

 

[Grinder]

Vixen have you found even one other case in which blood was not on a knife but the victim's DNA was found? How would the DNA have survived a three day bleaching?

Do you have a credible source for Vinci finding Amanda's DNA on the clasp? I can't find this on any site in English. If her DNA was found there, how would that fit with your murder theory? Do you think Amanda and Raf grabbed the bra together and left their DNAs only on the clasp side? How did Steffi miss it? What else did she miss? Maybe Rudi's DNA and blood in F's room?

 

[Methos]

I think you misunderstood me. I am very much doubting your assertion that Amanda's DNA was on the bra clasp, and I want to see a clear, readable copy of Vinci's report, not a blurry screenshot that is nearly impossible to make out. Context included. In particular, his conclusions and methodology.

Again (without seeing the context, since you only posted a tiny part of the report that was barely readable. Similar to how you said Raffaele had a Devil manga tattoo on his shoulder by posting a picture where you couldn't tell what the tattoo actually was), what I am guessing that section of the report is saying is that Amanda's profile was *compatible* with the sample taken from the bra clasp at certain loci. Unless Amanda's profile matched at a sufficient number of loci and a statistical analysis concluded that Amanda's DNA was on the bra clasp, this is entirely meaningless. There were 5 contributors to the DNA sample on the bra clasp -- Amanda's will match some loci by sheer random chance (as would you or I, or anyone else).

So, again I ask: can you post a non-blurry copy of the FULL REPORT. English translation preferred for obvious reasons, but let's at least start with the full context of the document under discussion so it's at least in principle possible to translate and understand what Vinci was saying.

Here is a machine readable version of the document posted on TMoMK. It looks like Prof Vinci is talking about "stutter bands" (page 8-12)

Le nostre osservazioni, per quanto sopra premesso ed in particolare in relazione alla nostra diversa intepretazione dei picchi definiti dalla Dott.ssa Stefanoni quali "stutter bands" portano a ritenere:
- per il marcatore D8S1179, la definizione degli alleli 11 (pur essendo di poco al di sotto della soglia), 12 e 14, farebbe emergere la compatibilità con i genotipi della Knox (11/12) e di Guede (14/14);
- per il marcatore D21S11, la definizione dell'allele 29 in aggiunta a quelli definiti nel profilo indicato dalla Dott.ssa Stefanoni, identifica la compatibilità con i genotipi della Knox (29/30) e di Guede (29/29);
- per il rnarcatore CFS1PO, la nuova definizione del profilo evidenzia la compatibilita con il profilo della Knox (11/12);
- per il marcatore D3S1358, la nuova definizione del profilo evidenzia la compatibilita con i genotipi di Guede (15/16, sebbene il 15 sia di poco al di sotto della soglia di 50 RFU) e della Knox (15118, sebbene il 15 sia di poco al di sotto della soglia di 50 RFU);
- per il marcatore THO1, la nuova definizione del profilo evidenzia la compatibilità con il genotipo della Knox (6/8) e di quello del Guede (7/9, ove però I'allele 7 può essere solo ipotizzato perché mancano le caratteristiche relative all'area, alla definizione allelica ed all'altezza del picco);
- per il marcatore D13S317, si evidenzia la compatibilita con i genotipi della Knox (11/13, ove però I'allele 11 può essere solo ipotizzato perché mancano le caratteristiche relative all'area, alla definizione allelica ed all'altezza del picco);
- per il marcatore D16S539 si evidenzia la compatibilità con il genotipo della Knox (1 0/11) e con il genotipo di Guede (9/11, ove pero I'allele 9 può essere solo ipotizzato perché mancano le caratteristiche relative all'area, alla definizione allelica ed all'altezza del picco);
- per il marcatore D2S1338, l'analisi del nuovo profilo evidenzia compatibilità
con il genotipo del Guede (16/23) e con il genotipo della Knox (18/20, ove il 18 puo essere solo ipotizzato perché al sotto della soglia di 50 RFU);
- per il marcatore D19S433, l'analisi del nuovo profilo evidenzia compatibilità
con quello della Knox (13/16,2, sebbene quest'ultimo possa essere solo ipotizzato perche mancante delle informazioni necessarie alla sua definizione) e con quello del Guede (13/14.2, sebbene quest'ultimo possa essere solo ipotizzato perché mancante delle informazioni necessarie alla sua definizione);
- per il marcatore TPOX, l'analisi del nuovo profilo evidenzia compatibilità
con quello della Knox (8/8) e con quello di Guede (8/9);
- per il marcatore D18S51, l'analisi del nuovo profilo evidenzia compatibilità
con quello dello della Knox (13/17) e con quello di Guede (14/15);
- per il marcatore D5S818, l'analisi del nuovo profilo evidenzia compatibilità
con il genotipo della Knox (13/13) e di Guede (12/13);
SINTESI CONCLUSIVA
Sulla base di quanto osservato si sottolinea la superficialità nell'attribuzione degli alleli e la complessità intrinseca dell'interpretazione di una mistura costituita, a nostro avviso, da almeno 3 diversi DNA, oltre a quello della Kercher.
Nel considerare gli alleli e le aree sottese per ciascun picco è evidente come esse siano l'espressione di svariate combinazioni genotipiche in aggiunta a quelle ritenute compatibili. In relazione a quest'ultimo aspetto, è opportuno sottolineare che alla luce del nuovo profilo da noi ottenuto, considerando gli alleli precedentemente omessi, si evidenzia la compatibilità con ulteriori profili genetici diversi da quello di Raffaele Sollecito; in particolare questi profili genetici risultano compatibili con alcuni marcatori attribuiti a Amanda Knox e Rudy Guede.

 

[Grinder]

Only problem is, the other allelles are Rudy's and Amanda's. So, Rudy's is accurate, but Amanda's is "contamination"? Why is Raff throwing Amanda under the bus by publicising her presence?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-bloody-bra-claim-ex-boyfriends-lawyers.html

No mention in this Vogt article from same date.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Knox-will-stand-trial-for-murder-1289629.php

On Tuesday Judge Micheli found former drifter Rudy Guede, 21, guilty of murdering and sexually assaulting Miss Kercher and sentenced him to the maximum 30 years in jail.
In a 17-page summing up of the evidence, the judge set out the evidence on which he decided to send Miss Knox and Mr Sollecito to trial.
He dismissed as “fantasy” prosecutors’ claims that the sex game in which Miss Kercher is alleged to have died was inspired by Satanic rites, Halloween rituals or violent Japanese ‘manga’ comics about dead vampires.
But he did say that there was enough evidence to suggest that Miss Kercher had been killed by more than one person and that DNA evidence presented by prosecutors might prove that Miss Knox and Mr Sollecito were in the house that night....
...They say they found Mr Sollecito’s DNA on the victim’s bra, although his defence team says the bra bore multiple DNA traces and argue it must have been accidentally contaminated during the investigation.


No mention of AK's on bra.

I did find this

Yesterday Sollecito's lawyers said for the first time that there could be DNA on Meredith's bra from all three suspects and not just Sollecito, which they said backed up their claims that the bra was so evidentially contaminated after police mistakenly left it on the floor of Kercher's bedroom for weeks before testing it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...f-disappointment-at-being-sent-for-trial.html

On balance I'd guess poor reporting in your example.

 

[Planigale]

Here is a machine readable version of the document posted on TMoMK. It looks like Prof Vinci is talking about "stutter bands" (page 8-12)

Vinci it should be remembered is not a 'DNA' expert. The point he makes (wrongly imho) is that loci attributed to Sollecito could have been contributed to by others. This is why the likelihood ratio should be used for presenting DNA results quite tricky with mixed DNA but I am sure Vixen will be happy to explain.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Here is a machine readable version of the document posted on TMoMK. It looks like Prof Vinci is talking about "stutter bands" (page 8-12)

thanks for that Methos. Translated conclusion (google translate):

Based on what you observed in the allocation emphasizes the superficiality of the alleles and interpretation inherent complexity of a mixture consisting, in our opinion, at least three different DNA, as well as that of Kercher.
In considering the alleles and the underlying areas for each peak it is evident as they are the expression of various genotypic combinations in addition to those deemed compatible. In relation to the latter, it should be noted that in light of the new profile we got, considering the previously omitted alleles, it highlights the compatibility with further genetic profile different from that of Raffaele Sollecito; in particular these genetic profiles are compatible with some markers attributed to Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede.

i.e. there were a bunch of different profiles on there. Proving it was contamination as we have known all along. Whether we can conclude if one of the profiles in the DNA mixture was Amanda depends on a statistical analysis; which depends on number of matching loci, their positions, and peak height/quality. Given that Dr. Balding did such a statistical analysis and did not conclude Amanda was in the profile we know that either a) it wasn't Amanda's profile (i.e. it was a mixture of the other 4 individuals that happened to match Amanda at a small subset of the loci) or b) it was inconclusive and we cannot determine if Amanda's profile was in there.

Yes Vixen, this piece of evidence is worthless (even for Rudy). It could have been contamination even for him. This is due to the failure to collect the bra clasp immediately and not kick it around the room for 46 days. Luckily Rudy admits he was there, his bloody hand print and shoe print were at the crime scene, his DNA was in other spots including Meredith's purse and Meredith's vagina, and we know he broke in because a rock was thrown through a window and that's how Rudy broke into places in his recent past. So the bra clasp does not change our estimate of Rudy's guilt. Thanks for playing.

 

[NotEvenWrong]

Alternatively, if all that talk of science and molecular biology makes you think I am on the Amanda Knox pagan witch sorceress payroll, realize nobody ever in all 3 trials asserted the bra clasp had Amanda's DNA on it, meaning Amanda's DNA wasn't on it.

 

[Mike1711]

Yeah, that's what happens when you isolate events into piecemeal.

If there had been a savage murder in your house, the perspective would change.

Was there a savage murder in Raf.'s house?

Thought not.

Actually a few years ago there was a savage murder at a house about 300m from my house. Strangely nobody came looking for bleach at my house. I can't understand why not?

 

[Planigale]

thanks for that Methos. Translated conclusion (google translate):

Based on what you observed in the allocation emphasizes the superficiality of the alleles and interpretation inherent complexity of a mixture consisting, in our opinion, at least three different DNA, as well as that of Kercher.
In considering the alleles and the underlying areas for each peak it is evident as they are the expression of various genotypic combinations in addition to those deemed compatible. In relation to the latter, it should be noted that in light of the new profile we got, considering the previously omitted alleles, it highlights the compatibility with further genetic profile different from that of Raffaele Sollecito; in particular these genetic profiles are compatible with some markers attributed to Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede.

i.e. there were a bunch of different profiles on there. Proving it was contamination as we have known all along. Whether we can conclude if one of the profiles in the DNA mixture was Amanda depends on a statistical analysis; which depends on number of matching loci, their positions, and peak height/quality. Given that Dr. Balding did such a statistical analysis and did not conclude Amanda was in the profile we know that either a) it wasn't Amanda's profile (i.e. it was a mixture of the other 4 individuals that happened to match Amanda at a small subset of the loci) or b) it was inconclusive and we cannot determine if Amanda's profile was in there.

Yes Vixen, this piece of evidence is worthless (even for Rudy). It could have been contamination even for him. This is due to the failure to collect the bra clasp immediately and not kick it around the room for 46 days. Luckily Rudy admits he was there, his bloody hand print and shoe print were at the crime scene, his DNA was in other spots including Meredith's purse and Meredith's vagina, and we know he broke in because a rock was thrown through a window and that's how Rudy broke into places in his recent past. So the bra clasp does not change our estimate of Rudy's guilt. Thanks for playing.

From Balding http://www.pnas.org/content/110/30/12241.full#sec-2

"In reviewing the evidence, Vecchiotti and Conti agreed with the alleles originally identified but also reported many additional epg peaks. They cited recommendation 6 of Gill et al. in concluding that all peaks in stutter positions should be regarded as allelic. Of the 24 additional peaks identified by Vecchiotti and Conti, of which 6 had heights below the threshold of 50 relative fluorescence units, 9 are included in the profile of the other codefendant, Knox, providing apparent support for the presence of DNA from her. However, four of her alleles were not observed, including two homozygotes, which are less prone to dropout.

These interpretations pose problems for standard methods of evidence evaluation because of the alleles not attributable to any of the profiled individuals, uncertainty over whether or not Knox is a contributor, and the need to allow for the possibility that subthreshold peaks may be allelic. The number of above-threshold alleles recorded at any locus is six or less, which implies three or more contributors of DNA. However, if Knox is assumed to be a contributor, the alleles not attributable to her still imply three or more other contributors. I first compare these prosecution (Graphic) and defence (Graphic) hypotheses for the contributors of DNA:

Graphic: Kercher, Knox, Sollecito, and one unknown individual

Graphic: Kercher, Knox, and two unknown individuals

I introduce an innovation to likelihood-based analyses to allow for an “uncertain” allele designation. In previous formulations (5⇓⇓⇓⇓–10), the likelihood at a locus in a profiling run is the product over all allelic positions in the epg of one of four possible terms, according to whether or not the corresponding allele is represented in the crime scene profile (CSP) and whether or not it is included in the profiles of any of the hypothesized contributors (Materials and Methods). I introduce here a fifth possibility corresponding to an absence of information about whether the allele is present, irrespective of whether or not it is included in the profile of a hypothesized contributor. An assumption of no information is appropriate if there is substantial uncertainty, for example, due to borderline peak height or the possibility that a peak is due to stutter or other artifact.

Using this uncertain designation for the six subthreshold alleles, the estimated dropout rate for Knox is close to 100%. A separate analysis with her as the queried contributor returned an LR < 1, also favoring a conclusion of no DNA from her. I reran the analysis excluding Knox from both Graphic and Graphic, and obtained an LR in favor of Graphic of 42 million (WoE = 7.6 bans). Thus, although the additional alleles have, by providing evidence for an additional contributor, weakened the evidence implicating Sollecito by a massive 8 bans, this evidence nevertheless remains strong. Moreover, Gill et al. did not consider uncertain designations for peaks that are potentially due to stutter. After reclassifying as uncertain all peaks below 15% of the height at one extra repeat unit, a common stutter guideline, there remain four alleles not attributable to either Sollecito or Kercher and the WoE is increased to 10.7 bans.

Note that I cannot address here issues of how the DNA came to be in the exhibit: Possible contamination was an issue in the trial and appeal. I only consider whether there is DNA from Sollecito for which the evidence remains very strong after allowing for the additional alleles identified by Vecchiotti and Conti (2) and the possibility that apparent stutters are allelic."

In summary no DNA attributable to Knox. DNA attributable to Sollecito very likely, but how it came to be there is not something statistics can answer. DNA from at least one other individual other than Sollecito and Kercher present on the bra hook.

 

[Methos]

Vinci it should be remembered is not a 'DNA' expert. The point he makes (wrongly imho) is that loci attributed to Sollecito could have been contributed to by others. This is why the likelihood ratio should be used for presenting DNA results quite tricky with mixed DNA but I am sure Vixen will be happy to explain.

thanks for that Methos. Translated conclusion (google translate):

Based on what you observed in the allocation emphasizes the superficiality of the alleles and interpretation inherent complexity of a mixture consisting, in our opinion, at least three different DNA, as well as that of Kercher.
In considering the alleles and the underlying areas for each peak it is evident as they are the expression of various genotypic combinations in addition to those deemed compatible. In relation to the latter, it should be noted that in light of the new profile we got, considering the previously omitted alleles, it highlights the compatibility with further genetic profile different from that of Raffaele Sollecito; in particular these genetic profiles are compatible with some markers attributed to Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede.

i.e. there were a bunch of different profiles on there. Proving it was contamination as we have known all along. Whether we can conclude if one of the profiles in the DNA mixture was Amanda depends on a statistical analysis; which depends on number of matching loci, their positions, and peak height/quality. Given that Dr. Balding did such a statistical analysis and did not conclude Amanda was in the profile we know that either a) it wasn't Amanda's profile (i.e. it was a mixture of the other 4 individuals that happened to match Amanda at a small subset of the loci) or b) it was inconclusive and we cannot determine if Amanda's profile was in there.

Yes Vixen, this piece of evidence is worthless (even for Rudy). It could have been contamination even for him. This is due to the failure to collect the bra clasp immediately and not kick it around the room for 46 days. Luckily Rudy admits he was there, his bloody hand print and shoe print were at the crime scene, his DNA was in other spots including Meredith's purse and Meredith's vagina, and we know he broke in because a rock was thrown through a window and that's how Rudy broke into places in his recent past. So the bra clasp does not change our estimate of Rudy's guilt. Thanks for playing.

From Balding http://www.pnas.org/content/110/30/12241.full#sec-2

"In reviewing the evidence, Vecchiotti and Conti agreed with the alleles originally identified but also reported many additional epg peaks. They cited recommendation 6 of Gill et al. in concluding that all peaks in stutter positions should be regarded as allelic. Of the 24 additional peaks identified by Vecchiotti and Conti, of which 6 had heights below the threshold of 50 relative fluorescence units, 9 are included in the profile of the other codefendant, Knox, providing apparent support for the presence of DNA from her. However, four of her alleles were not observed, including two homozygotes, which are less prone to dropout.

These interpretations pose problems for standard methods of evidence evaluation because of the alleles not attributable to any of the profiled individuals, uncertainty over whether or not Knox is a contributor, and the need to allow for the possibility that subthreshold peaks may be allelic. The number of above-threshold alleles recorded at any locus is six or less, which implies three or more contributors of DNA. However, if Knox is assumed to be a contributor, the alleles not attributable to her still imply three or more other contributors. I first compare these prosecution (Graphic) and defence (Graphic) hypotheses for the contributors of DNA:

Graphic: Kercher, Knox, Sollecito, and one unknown individual

Graphic: Kercher, Knox, and two unknown individuals

I introduce an innovation to likelihood-based analyses to allow for an “uncertain” allele designation. In previous formulations (5⇓⇓⇓⇓–10), the likelihood at a locus in a profiling run is the product over all allelic positions in the epg of one of four possible terms, according to whether or not the corresponding allele is represented in the crime scene profile (CSP) and whether or not it is included in the profiles of any of the hypothesized contributors (Materials and Methods). I introduce here a fifth possibility corresponding to an absence of information about whether the allele is present, irrespective of whether or not it is included in the profile of a hypothesized contributor. An assumption of no information is appropriate if there is substantial uncertainty, for example, due to borderline peak height or the possibility that a peak is due to stutter or other artifact.

Using this uncertain designation for the six subthreshold alleles, the estimated dropout rate for Knox is close to 100%. A separate analysis with her as the queried contributor returned an LR < 1, also favoring a conclusion of no DNA from her. I reran the analysis excluding Knox from both Graphic and Graphic, and obtained an LR in favor of Graphic of 42 million (WoE = 7.6 bans). Thus, although the additional alleles have, by providing evidence for an additional contributor, weakened the evidence implicating Sollecito by a massive 8 bans, this evidence nevertheless remains strong. Moreover, Gill et al. did not consider uncertain designations for peaks that are potentially due to stutter. After reclassifying as uncertain all peaks below 15% of the height at one extra repeat unit, a common stutter guideline, there remain four alleles not attributable to either Sollecito or Kercher and the WoE is increased to 10.7 bans.

Note that I cannot address here issues of how the DNA came to be in the exhibit: Possible contamination was an issue in the trial and appeal. I only consider whether there is DNA from Sollecito for which the evidence remains very strong after allowing for the additional alleles identified by Vecchiotti and Conti (2) and the possibility that apparent stutters are allelic."

In summary no DNA attributable to Knox. DNA attributable to Sollecito very likely, but how it came to be there is not something statistics can answer. DNA from at least one other individual other than Sollecito and Kercher present on the bra hook.

So, once again, much ado about nothing

 

[NotEvenWrong]

From Balding http://www.pnas.org/content/110/30/12241.full#sec-2

"In reviewing the evidence, Vecchiotti and Conti agreed with the alleles originally identified but also reported many additional epg peaks. They cited recommendation 6 of Gill et al. in concluding that all peaks in stutter positions should be regarded as allelic. Of the 24 additional peaks identified by Vecchiotti and Conti, of which 6 had heights below the threshold of 50 relative fluorescence units, 9 are included in the profile of the other codefendant, Knox, providing apparent support for the presence of DNA from her. However, four of her alleles were not observed, including two homozygotes, which are less prone to dropout.

These interpretations pose problems for standard methods of evidence evaluation because of the alleles not attributable to any of the profiled individuals, uncertainty over whether or not Knox is a contributor, and the need to allow for the possibility that subthreshold peaks may be allelic. The number of above-threshold alleles recorded at any locus is six or less, which implies three or more contributors of DNA. However, if Knox is assumed to be a contributor, the alleles not attributable to her still imply three or more other contributors. I first compare these prosecution (Graphic) and defence (Graphic) hypotheses for the contributors of DNA:

Graphic: Kercher, Knox, Sollecito, and one unknown individual

Graphic: Kercher, Knox, and two unknown individuals

I introduce an innovation to likelihood-based analyses to allow for an “uncertain” allele designation. In previous formulations (5⇓⇓⇓⇓–10), the likelihood at a locus in a profiling run is the product over all allelic positions in the epg of one of four possible terms, according to whether or not the corresponding allele is represented in the crime scene profile (CSP) and whether or not it is included in the profiles of any of the hypothesized contributors (Materials and Methods). I introduce here a fifth possibility corresponding to an absence of information about whether the allele is present, irrespective of whether or not it is included in the profile of a hypothesized contributor. An assumption of no information is appropriate if there is substantial uncertainty, for example, due to borderline peak height or the possibility that a peak is due to stutter or other artifact.

Using this uncertain designation for the six subthreshold alleles, the estimated dropout rate for Knox is close to 100%. A separate analysis with her as the queried contributor returned an LR < 1, also favoring a conclusion of no DNA from her. I reran the analysis excluding Knox from both Graphic and Graphic, and obtained an LR in favor of Graphic of 42 million (WoE = 7.6 bans). Thus, although the additional alleles have, by providing evidence for an additional contributor, weakened the evidence implicating Sollecito by a massive 8 bans, this evidence nevertheless remains strong. Moreover, Gill et al. did not consider uncertain designations for peaks that are potentially due to stutter. After reclassifying as uncertain all peaks below 15% of the height at one extra repeat unit, a common stutter guideline, there remain four alleles not attributable to either Sollecito or Kercher and the WoE is increased to 10.7 bans.

Note that I cannot address here issues of how the DNA came to be in the exhibit: Possible contamination was an issue in the trial and appeal. I only consider whether there is DNA from Sollecito for which the evidence remains very strong after allowing for the additional alleles identified by Vecchiotti and Conti (2) and the possibility that apparent stutters are allelic."

In summary no DNA attributable to Knox. DNA attributable to Sollecito very likely, but how it came to be there is not something statistics can answer. DNA from at least one other individual other than Sollecito and Kercher present on the bra hook.

Oh Vixxypoo, do you have any other "evidence" from 7 years ago that has already been thoroughly analyzed and debunked by people who actually know what they are talking about? Other than Balding and Vinci being part of the Masonic conspiracy, I mean. We already know about that.

 

[acbytesla]

Things Vixen has claimed but offered no proof.

Making a list of Vixen's nonsense claims. Not disputed like the so called woman's shoe print supposedly found in Meredith's bedroom. Anything she provided no evidence of. I'll start with her latest. Please add to it.
1. Amanda Knox's DNA was found on the bra.
2. Hellmann was paid off.
3. Conti and Vechiotti was paid off.
4. Dr. Gill was paid off.
5. Detective Douglas was paid off.
6. Bruno Marasca's motivation was illegal.

I could go on but everyone should contribute.

 

[Bill Williams]

Making a list of Vixen's nonsense claims. Not disputed like the so called woman's shoe print supposedly found in Meredith's bedroom. Anything she provided no evidence of. I'll start with her latest. Please add to it.
1. Amanda Knox's DNA was found on the bra.
2. Hellmann was paid off.
3. Conti and Vechiotti was paid off.
4. Dr. Gill was paid off.
5. Detective Douglas was paid off.
6. Bruno Marasca's motivation was illegal.

I could go on but everyone should contribute.

7. There were no bars on the window below Filomena's window.

 

[acbytesla]

7. There were no bars on the window below Filomena's window.

C'mon Bill, you can think of more than one.

 

[Bill Williams]

C'mon Bill, you can think of more than one.

I've been pouting ever since finding out Grinder has 1 more post than me....

 

[Grinder]

Here's a bit from the other side demonstrating once again a missing link in a brain:

Sadly, this appears to be the new standard in the exoneration biz. Even if the defendant's DNA was the main profile found on the evidence, any random bits of DNA floating around creates RD that "other attackers" were involved.

Even though RS and AK's complete profiles were found at the crime scene, incomplete profiles were grasped on by the MB court as proof of contamination. Odd, then the standards used to convict Guede were found wanting in the other two defendant's favour.

Why is it difficult for the PGP and Italians to understand that DNA found of Rudi is more significant than the kids' DNA because one kid lived there and the other had been there several times as well as the fact that the only DNA of the visitor kid was found on a piece of bra that had been moved around the floor and had clear signs of some contamination?

Why do they keep up with their silly Rudi's DNA shouldn't count either meme? Okay don't use it, fine. Just use his palm print, shoe prints and Skype and court admission he was there. Even though his DNA wasn't all LCN and had no business being there and some of it was found in the first tested samples gathered the day after not a month and half later, the PGP act as if it is just like Raf's. Of course, Amanda's is only on a knife that had been cleaned and used for cooking.

If anything, the DNA would free Amanda from any connection and only leave Raf and Rudi.

 

[Desert Fox]

Grinder, I would argue very simply that there is this irrational hatred of Amanda. Why, I have no clue. As far as I can tell, she is not special in any way. She is attractive but she is no super model. She seems to be more of a nerd than anything else as well.

It just seems to be all about getting Amanda

 

[Grinder]

Grinder, I would argue very simply that there is this irrational hatred of Amanda. Why, I have no clue. As far as I can tell, she is not special in any way. She is attractive but she is no super model. She seems to be more of a nerd than anything else as well.

It just seems to be all about getting Amanda

Well the thing is they seem to be after every person charged with anything. They hate the "Innocence Project' in general and really hate Scheck in particular. The quote above was about another case. For them DNA should only be used to prosecute not for defending a person charged.

The DNA alleged to be on the knife is less than 1/10,000 of a grain of salt yet the PGP act like secondary or tertiary transfer is a far-fetched idea.

The different reasons various PGP have focused on this case are hard to determine. I strongly believe certain middle aged Seattle women were jealous of Amanda's youth and one being ex-pat herself has a problem with how Americans behave in her adopted havens of culture.

 

[Vixen]

Was there a savage murder in Raf.'s house?

Thought not.

Actually a few years ago there was a savage murder at a house about 300m from my house. Strangely nobody came looking for bleach at my house. I can't understand why not?

You were not at the murder scene when police arrived? It's fortuitous you were steered away from joining the police by your careers advisers, as a key competence required is good observational skills.