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

[NancyS]

(in the US DNA is often collected years after a crime and convictions are made ... but never mind.)

Do you mean tested rather than collected? Where has DNA evidence been collected years after a crime and conviction has been made?

 

[Diocletus]

Again, you are accepting the DNA evidence against Rudy by the shoddy forensics team? Do you not see why this is amusing to some people? They didn't follow protocols, period, right? Or they just happened to follow protocols while collecting the Rudy evidence? That is an amazing coincidence.

Did Rudy ever contest the DNA evidence?

Personally, I'm pretty convinced by the DNA in the vagina, but whatever.

 

[Dan O.]

The same crime lab determined it was Guede's DNA. It appears you cherrypick which forensics you think are legit and which ones you think are shoddy. It isn't a coincidence that matches up with who you think is innocent and who you think is guilty. It is more rational to believe all 3 are guilty if the same forensics team identified all 3 of their DNA plus the victim's DNA on the blade of the knife.

What a load of repeated crap straight out of the guilter talking points. You have tagged yourself as 100% guilter who has no intent in engaging in a rational discussion.

What is the DNA evidence against Amanda? It is one spot of blood on the handle of a knife that is incompatible with the wounds found in a drawer in an appartment far from the murder scene where Amanda had been staying for the last couple of weeks. It is DNA of Amanda in the bathroom and halls of Raffaele's apartment. It is DNA and one spot of dried blood found in the bathroom and DNA in the hall in the cottage that Amanda had been using for the last couple of months. None of this DNA evidence is tied to Meredith's murder. Amanda's DNA was found where it would be expected to be found. Amanda's DNA was not found in the room where Meredith was murdered. Amanda's DNA was not found on the victim.

What is the DNA evidence against Raffaele? It is a possible YSTR match from multiple YSTR profiles from one hook of the detached bra clasp that had been left at the crime scene for 46 days and collected with great fan fair and then subsequently destroyed precluding further testing. No Y profiles were found on the other hook. Raffaele's DNA was not found elsewhere on the victim, her clothing or elsewhere in the room where she was murdered.

What is the DNA evidence Against Rudy Guede? His DNA was found on the zipper of the victim's purse in a crime that involves theft of cash, credit cards and cell phones. His DNA was found on the cuff of the victim's bloody sweatshirt that was forcefully removed. His DNA was found on the back right band of the victim's bra where lifting a body by the band in that location would result in the bra tearing apart as it apparently had. Prior to Rudy being identified, his DNA was found inside the vagina of the victim that was stripped mostly naked and her hips propped up on a pillow in a fashion that would facilitate sexual intercourse.

What we have here is one suspect with multiple DNA traces tied directly to the crime and two other suspects whoose DNA was found where their DNA would be expected to be found except for the bra clasp which has no rational explanation other than secondary transfer or contamination.

Like so many that have come before, your argument is full of stupid. If your DNA was found in your bathroom, would you accept that you should be found guilty of murder on that evidence alone?

 

[Bill Williams]

Bill

His sentenced was reduced because he requested the fast track option. Amanda and RS had that option as well. They had an all or nothing approach and you have to live with the consequences of legal risk taking.

I support all of them getting life.

He didn't testify against them in court so why do you believe that his comments outside of court would get him reduced sentence. That makes no sense.

I am talking about the accusation that he named them. I believe that he got special treatment because by requesting the fast track option, it allowed the original prosecution to have things entered as "judicial fact" without testing, either by a pesky trial-phase, much less one in which AK and RS had opportunity to participate.

I am relieved you admit that he did not testify against them in court. What then do you make of Mignini reading "Rudy's letter", one which Rudy himself refused to read?

 

[NancyS]

Nancy,

You MUST have a source of contaminaton. This is a REAL constraint.

If you say these 4 men left DNA on this bra clasp, then it is reasonable to expect at least 1 of them to have left some DNA elsewhere in the house. Think in terms of probablities.

Again, you are accepting the DNA evidence against Rudy by the shoddy forensics team? Do you not see why this is amusing to some people? They didn't follow protocols, period, right? Or they just happened to follow protocols while collecting the Rudy evidence? That is an amazing coincidence.

I'll say it again, chuck out the DNA against Guede and convict him on handprint and shoeprint

And again we have no idea whose DNA was in the house as most of the house was not tested - we also have no idea who Meredith had kissed, shaken hands with or eaten with during the last few days - all could potentially transfer their DNA to Meredith - this would include Raffaele and is why I believe that secondary transfer, which is a form of contamination, is a possible explanation for FOUR men's DNA being found on her bra clasp - and this is why Professor Gill argues that this type of LCN DNA is not valid in this case as should not be used to convict people who had legitimate access to the crime scene and had spent time with the victim

Why do you think no blood was found on the clothes that Amanda was seen wearing earlier that day?

 

[Bill Williams]

He said he had sex with her. No need to contest it. But this is still proof that the crime lab people have some competence. They also had to go to his house and get the profile to even compare with that at the cottage. So in two DNA tests involving Rudy, they nailed it. But the shoddiness occures with the knife and the bra clasp pointing to the other two? Don't you see how that argument is a tough sale?

No. The interesting fact is that those two things have to be "sold", and not allowed to go before independent analysis.

Once again, do you admit that 36B and all of 165 no longer exist?

 

[NancyS]

He said he had sex with her. No need to contest it. But this is still proof that the crime lab people have some competence. They also had to go to his house and get the profile to even compare with that at the cottage. So in two DNA tests involving Rudy, they nailed it. But the shoddiness occures with the knife and the bra clasp pointing to the other two? Don't you see how that argument is a tough sale?

Not after the Independent review, which trashed the DNA on the knife and bra clasp. It would be interesting to see what an Independent expert would say about Guede's results - but you can convict him on his handprint and shoeprint alone.

 

[Samson]

Ok, we can look at it another way.

There was much greater discripancies between Rudy's footprint and the one on the mat. That eliminates any margin of error discussion.

The issue is what you need for your beliefs, so far the knife the bra clasp the staged break in and the footprint in simple terms, but of course these are debated, as you know.
A safer way to begin is to look at some undebated evidence, eg
1. The photographs of the vandalised window complex
2. The work of the gastric pathology
3. The lack of blood traces on the possessions of A and R.
4. The homecoming time of the victim
5. The alibi till 9 30 plus for Sollecito (and Amanda)
6. That Raffaele was refused access to a calendar when discussing events 100 hours previous
7. That Guede was a criminal, carrying stolen equipment before the murder.
8. That he has a wound from a previous knife fight on his stomach.
9. That he carried a knife in his back pack.
10. That Amanda and Raffaele had clean police records.

Bit by bit it becomes incumbent on people to interpret the evidence and wonder about the break in, the footprint, the knife and the bra clasp, and whether tampering or contamination could better tie the evidential elements together.

 

[Diocletus]

He said he had sex with her. No need to contest it. But this is still proof that the crime lab people have some competence. They also had to go to his house and get the profile to even compare with that at the cottage. So in two DNA tests involving Rudy, they nailed it. But the shoddiness occures with the knife and the bra clasp pointing to the other two? Don't you see how that argument is a tough sale?

Am I supposed to be impressed by the cops finding Rudy's DNA on his own toothbrush?

BTW, it appears that they screwed up or are suppressing plenty of results from Guede's apartment.

 

[Poppy1016]

He said he had sex with her. No need to contest it. But this is still proof that the crime lab people have some competence. They also had to go to his house and get the profile to even compare with that at the cottage. So in two DNA tests involving Rudy, they nailed it. But the shoddiness occures with the knife and the bra clasp pointing to the other two? Don't you see how that argument is a tough sale?

I tend to agree with you about the DNA. The collection (see evidence collection video), testing and evaluation methods, and storage of evidence, we're so poorly done that we almost have to exclude DNA results pointing to RG also.
My question then would be, what evidence is left pointing to AK and RS? What evidence is left pointing to RG?

 

[js202]

Ok, we can look at it another way.

There was much greater discripancies between Rudy's footprint and the one on the mat. That eliminates any margin of error discussion.

This is absolutely false. You are buying nonsense from others rather than thinking with your own head.

The big toe and the angle of the arch on the bathmat clearly match Guede, not Sollecito. Sollecito has a very oddly shaped big toe; nothing like the one on the bathmat. Moreover, Guede himself admitted to cleaning off his bloody pant leg in the shower. Moreover, how could Knox and Sollecito be so diabolically thorough and clever to have expunged all traces of themselves in the murder room, and then, if it so clearly implicates Sollecito, leave the bathmat? (Curses, foiled again?) Occams Razor tells us the print is Guede's.

As usual, the lion's share of the, er, discripencies, in this case are on the side of those who convicted Knox and Sollecito in their hearts and minds before seriously constructing a theory based on the evidence.

 

[acbytesla]

(in the US DNA is often collected years after a crime and convictions are made ... but never mind.)

You mean like uncollected semen stains on pillowcase? The problem with your statement is that Raffaele had been in the apartment. In fact he spent hours there on the afternoon of November 1st and November 2nd. If the police had somehow discovered 46 days later Meredith's panties and found semen with Raffaele's DNA on them, I wouldn't argue that he's guilty.

But that isn't what happened. They went back on the day that they knew Raffaele's father was going to show the world that the shoe prints that the police had been saying for weeks belonged to Raffaele ACTUALLY belonged to Rudy. Why would they be going back if not to desperately plant/discover some other piece of incriminating evidence connecting Raffaele to this crime?

I don't doubt that Stefanoni presented an electropherogram that showed Raffaele's DNA was on that bra clasp. But we actually have no idea that Stefanoni actually tested the bra clasp. Stefanoni never presented the electronic data files along with the negative controls that are performed to protect against contamination. And mysteriously she then stored the bra clasp in LIQUID assuring that it would be worthless as opposed to properly storing it in an envelope. Why in the hell would she do that Vibio?

You can dismiss the idea that contamination is absurd, but the fact is that contamination DOES happen. That secondary transfer DOES happen. That corruption DOES happen. There are reasons that strict protocols are followed. And that is that we all feel confident that the system is fair and accountable. So when Stefanoni and the police fail to maintain a good chain of custody or fail to perform negative controls or hide data from the defense, a good judge will exclude the fruit of the poisonous tree.

 

[Diocletus]

This is absolutely false. You are buying nonsense from others rather than thinking with your own head.

The big toe and the angle of the arch on the bathmat clearly match Guede, not Sollecito. Sollecito has a very oddly shaped big toe; nothing like the one on the bathmat. Moreover, Guede himself admitted to cleaning off his bloody pant leg in the shower. Moreover, how could Knox and Sollecito be so diabolically thorough and clever to have expunged all traces of themselves in the murder room, and then, if it so clearly implicates Sollecito, leave the bathmat? (Curses, foiled again?) Occams Razor tells us the print is Guede's.

As usual, the lion's share of the, er, discripencies, in this case are on the side of those who convicted Knox and Sollecito in their hearts and minds before seriously constructing a theory based on the evidence.

Wasn't there a fold in the material? Or am I thinking of the knife print? Or the "Amanda" shoeprints in Kercher's room? I can never keep straight why the various imprints are reliable/not reliable.

 

[Desert Fox]

I'll say it again, chuck out the DNA against Guede and convict him on handprint and shoeprint
And again we have no idea whose DNA was in the house as most of the house was not tested - we also have no idea who Meredith had kissed, shaken hands with or eaten with during the last few days - all could potentially transfer their DNA to Meredith - this would include Raffaele and is why I believe that secondary transfer, which is a form of contamination, is a possible explanation for FOUR men's DNA being found on her bra clasp - and this is why Professor Gill argues that this type of LCN DNA is not valid in this case as should not be used to convict people who had legitimate access to the crime scene and had spent time with the victim

Why do you think no blood was found on the clothes that Amanda was seen wearing earlier that day?

I already actually brought up concerns myself about the DNA evidence against him. It has been argued back that (while nice) can be argued against him without the DNA.

 

[Strozzi]

He does not specifically say the other samples. It's a general scenario: DNA could have been left by her BF or any friend (male or female) that had reason to touch the clasp. What is important is the next line: "Ma tutto questo e irrilevante..." "
But all of this is irrelevant ..." What is significant is that Sollecito's was found there.

I want to know several things:
Whose DNA was on the clasp?
Was the DNA deposited on the clasp by contamination or direct contact?
What does any of this have to do with Raffaele Sollecito?

 

[Bill Williams]

4 men's profiles were not found on the bra clasp. Raffael's was found in abundance, a stronger result than for Guede. You support the Guede result but trash the Sollecito profile. I'm not saying you do but this does indicate you might have an agenda to advocate.

Judge Nencini said C&V's report was correct in the finding of four profiles on the clasp other than Meredith's. Why don't you?

Do you agree with Nencini that two of these y-genetic profiles come from women, Meredith's "amica"?

 

[Diocletus]

They still had to get a profile from his traces. And then that profile had to match the other traces's profile. Apparently they know how to get a correct profile , given Rudy admitted to being there.

I'm just suprrised you haven't been advocating Rudy's innocence just as as much as the two. You can't, because then how do you explain the window.

Right. And, I wonder, whose profile it is in the negative control that turned out to have DNA in it?

 

[bri1]

Nancy,

You MUST have a source of contaminaton. This is a REAL constraint.

If you say these 4 men left DNA on this bra clasp, then it is reasonable to expect at least 1 of them to have left some DNA elsewhere in the house. Think in terms of probablities.

Again, you are accepting the DNA evidence against Rudy by the shoddy forensics team? Do you not see why this is amusing to some people? They didn't follow protocols, period, right? Or they just happened to follow protocols while collecting the Rudy evidence? That is an amazing coincidence.

Aiken77 you really need to understand why methodology is important in science to understand why the blatant disregard for basic forensic collection, handling and testing protocols is so significant. (And it is blatant; when video- available to anyone on youtube- was shown in court of forensic techs at work, everyone laughed! They laughed because even a lay person can see the deficiencies).
Imagine if some parapsychologist claimed they'd proved psychic ability in a lab. The first thing their peers are going to check is the methodology. Was the supposedly psychic subject adequately shielded from information that could have contaminated the results? Here, the experimental protocols would be examined; if it is even a possibility that there are potential sources of contamination, the results would be deemed unreliable. Then they're going to check the data. Was the data calculated in the correct way to establish statistical signigicance? If they don't have enough data to check these calculations, they will demand it. If it is not provided, the results will be deemed unreliable ( I.e not fact) until such time as it can be provided.
In this case, there are two reasons that contamination must be ruled out by the prosecution (and I'm including forensic personnel in this term) rather than proved by the defense.
Thr first is scientific; the scientist must show her data is accurate and methodology valid and accurate in order for the result to be considered as reliable, or fact. C & V, plus tge videos of forensics investigation prove that guidelines were not followed. The methodology was not adhered to, and therefore the results are unreliable and cannot be used as proof or evidence. Until the data underlying the forensic testing is released, the defense cannot be sure that even the calculations are correct. The verifying data is absent, therefore the results can't be considered reliable.
The second reason is legal. The prosecution bears the burden of proof to the standard of beyond reasonable doubt. In forensics, we can never rule out all possibility of contaminaton. But the scientific and law enforcement communities have broadly agreed on a set of guidelines and protocols that, when followed, can rule out contamination to the degree that to suggest contamination would not be reasonable. All prosecutors then have to do to quash any defense claims of contamination in court is to prove that these internationally agreed-upon protocols have been followed. In many cases, actual investigators fall short to some extent. But in this case the short fall is emphatic.

 

[Bill Williams]

They weren't all clear profiles that you could use for identification, right?

It is my understanding one of them was Knox's but not enough loci to use it in court.

Other profiles doesn't explain how Raffaele's got to be there in abundance. You haven't shown what the source of Raffeale's DNA is if it just contamination. My understanding is so much of his was on it that it had to be direct touch transfer.

Has Nencini's report been translated yet? Where is it, I haven't read it?

Are you saying MK was a lesbian? Who was her female lover(s)?

I supplied the Italian language version of the Nencini report upthread. Other profiles in fact DO explain how Raffaele's got on to the clasp. This is the very essence of why Nencini argues that the other three got there through natural contact....

..... one which he assumes is Meredith's boyfriend, and the other two from "amica". Nencini believes he must argue against contamination.... why don't you?

 

[NancyS]

It could be argued that the footprint and handprint were one of the other 4 men you say were on the bra clasp. How do we know without their footprints and handprints to compare. It isn't improbable that out of 4 men, one of them might have had similar hand size as the one found, and one of them might have had similar foot size/shape as the one found. I think you have to toss that out too, along with the DNA. What else is left? Rudy's own admission, I guess. But you could say it was a forced false confession because we are using that to defend AK.

So we rule out Rudy and now we have 4 mystery men who did not appear to leave any DNA evidence except on this bra clasp. This bra clasp is a DNA magnet. We don't even have a clue who these 4 men could be which is kind of crazy.

As Guede opted for a fast track trial, I'm assuming that he isn't objecting to the evidence found against him and has even presented a reason for his DNA being found in Meredith's vagina.