Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #17

[otto]

So, September 5 is the next big day ... Monday. Maresca, who has recently been heavily criticised, will have a chance to cross examine the witnesses ... should be interesting. Then we have to wait for the decision.

Personally, I think the question of contamination is weak, particularly because there were 6 and 12 day intervals between the testing of the knife or bra clasp and the last related use of the machines. Contamination in the field is ruled out for the knife and the DNA on the blade is a match to Meredith ... if it wasn't contaminated in the field and it wasn't contaminated in the lab, then it wasn't contaminated and the DNA match on the blade means the knife was in contact with Meredith during the murder.

 

[sherlockh]

So, September 5 is the next big day ... Monday. Maresca, who has recently been heavily criticised, will have a chance to cross examine the witnesses ... should be interesting. Then we have to wait for the decision.

Personally, I think the question of contamination is weak, particularly because there were 6 and 12 day intervals between the testing of the knife or bra clasp and the last related use of the machines. Contamination in the field is ruled out for the knife and the DNA on the blade is a match to Meredith ... if it wasn't contaminated in the field and it wasn't contaminated in the lab, then it wasn't contaminated and the DNA match on the blade means the knife was in contact with Meredith during the murder.

I thought contamination for the knife at Rafs apartment is still up. You know the policemen who supposedly bagged it or boxed it, I dunno. I am expecting that to be cleared up with their explanation. I have not really seen a list of new witnesses so there might be some others as well.

 

[RoseMontague]

So, September 5 is the next big day ... Monday. Maresca, who has recently been heavily criticised, will have a chance to cross examine the witnesses ... should be interesting. Then we have to wait for the decision.

Personally, I think the question of contamination is weak, particularly because there were 6 and 12 day intervals between the testing of the knife or bra clasp and the last related use of the machines. Contamination in the field is ruled out for the knife and the DNA on the blade is a match to Meredith ... if it wasn't contaminated in the field and it wasn't contaminated in the lab, then it wasn't contaminated and the DNA match on the blade means the knife was in contact with Meredith during the murder.

I have not seen the testimony on this and I doubt a week's gap between testing means much of anything without knowing the context and a lot more information. DNA can survive for decades and machine contamination can be persistent. Take for example this article on LCN DNA. Here is a quote on equipment contamination>

British analysts were puzzled when the new technique turned up the same DNA profile from samples taken from the scenes of three very different types of crimes. The prospect of it being the DNA fingerprint of a most versatile criminal was extinguished when it proved to be the DNA of an employee of the German manufacturer of a piece of equipment used by the scientists.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10408000

Take the time to read the entire article, it is one of the best on LCN that I have seen.

 

[otto]

I thought contamination for the knife at Rafs apartment is still up. You know the policemen who supposedly bagged it or boxed it, I dunno. I am expecting that to be cleared up with their explanation. I have not really seen a list of new witnesses so there might be some others as well.

I would be very surprised to learn that investigators pulled on the same suits for both the cottage and the apartment ... wasn't it a different team?

As for the bagging and boxing, I understood that it was bagged and boxed at the scene, but the checking in officer seems confused about something.

 

[otto]

I have not seen the testimony on this and I doubt a week's gap between testing means much of anything without knowing the context and a lot more information. DNA can survive for decades and machine contamination can be persistent. Take for example this article on LCN DNA. Here is a quote on equipment contamination>



http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10408000

Take the time to read the entire article, it is one of the best on LCN that I have seen.

Haven't seen testimony about the 6 and 12 day gaps between evidence testing and prior related evidence testing? It was in the news and discussed after the last hearing - don't remember the date ... earlier this summer. DNA can survive for decades, even on a bra clasp after it's been kicked around.

I read the article months ago ... a sterile environment is required. Is there anything to suggest that the lab used to test evidence leading to the conviction of Guede is not sterile? Weird huh, that the lab used to test evidence leading to the conviction of Knox and Sollecito is suddenly filthy but when it was used to convict Guede, it was sterile ... and all the testing was ongoing at the same time.

 

[SMK]

So, September 5 is the next big day ... Monday. Maresca, who has recently been heavily criticised, will have a chance to cross examine the witnesses ... should be interesting. Then we have to wait for the decision.

Personally, I think the question of contamination is weak, particularly because there were 6 and 12 day intervals between the testing of the knife or bra clasp and the last related use of the machines. Contamination in the field is ruled out for the knife and the DNA on the blade is a match to Meredith ... if it wasn't contaminated in the field and it wasn't contaminated in the lab, then it wasn't contaminated and the DNA match on the blade means the knife was in contact with Meredith during the murder.

They say they will be having court every day until the trial is over, so likely Sep 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 or however long it takes to wrap things up.....

 

[SMK]

On the eve of trial week, the New York Times is running a special piece on Amanda Knox's mother:

Mother’s Long Vigil for Seattle Woman Jailed in Murder

PERUGIA, Italy — In the sweltering days of summer, the sun-scorched streets of this storied hilltop town echo with the indistinguishable conversations of world travelers here to explore its medieval and Renaissance palazzos or climb its steep alleys to catch a glimpse of the verdant Umbrian countryside.

Edda Mellas would rather be anywhere else. “I’m not here as a tourist; I’m here to take care of Amanda,” Ms. Mellas said on a recent muggy morning, sipping a glass of water in the cool comfort of a downtown cafe.

For nearly four years, ever since her daughter, Amanda Knox, was jailed on charges of killing her 21-year-old British roommate, Ms. Mellas — who “can’t remember what life was like before Amanda got arrested” — has grudgingly made Perugia a second home.

“Every summer, every Christmas holiday, every spring break, I’m here,” said Ms. Mellas, a teacher in Seattle. “Hundreds of sick days accumulated over 25 years of work, now gone.”

With an appeals court expected to render a decision on the case in September, Ms. Mellas is hopeful that the ordeal may finally be coming to a close.

[. . . ]A salacious dramatization of the murder, along with pages of DNA analysis as well as other evidence — telephone printouts, computer logs, fluorescent bloodstain-revealing chemicals and a statement by Ms. Knox that investigators believe is compromising — is included in a 427-page report by the presiding judges explaining why the jury convicted the two former students.

Ms. Mellas does not believe a word of it.

“People say, ‘You’re Amanda’s mom, you’d be saying that no matter what,’ ” she said. But maternal loyalty goes hand in hand with her conviction that the prosecution’s case is unsound. “You love your kids, but no way would we fight the way we’ve been fighting if there was evidence that she was guilty,” Ms. Mellas said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/01/world/europe/01italy.html

 

[sherlockh]

On the eve of trial week, the New York Times is running a special piece on Amanda Knox's mother:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/01/world/europe/01italy.html

Amazing. They put in a whole paragraph quoting Comodi

The DNA “is just one element of the accusatory case,” one prosecutor, Manuela Comodi, said in a telephone interview before leaving for her summer holidays. Apart from other physical elements tying the couple to the crime, “other proof must be considered,” she said, starting with their alibi and a break-in at the apartment that prosecutors believe was staged to deflect suspicion “from someone who lived in the house, and that person could only be Amanda.”

 

[SMK]

Amazing. They put in a whole paragraph quoting Comodi

Yes, of course, it is the New York Times, after all. In any case, it will be interesting to see what unfolds, Monday Sep 5- 10, and then the verdict not long after.......

 

[SMK]

And from the New York Examiner:

Italian judges must acquit Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito as "Non Colpevoli"


The facts objectively and legally demonstrate that Rudy Guede is definitely the author of the murder. Meanwhile the prosecution's theory failed to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are guilty and what was their contribution to the crime.

The acquittal of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito might finally lead to the unexpected result of knowing the truth. How? Because if Amanda and Raffaele will be acquitted maybe Mr. Guede will finally tell us what happened to Meredith Kercher.

This is why the judge must acquit them from all the charges and hope this judiciary mess would be erased once and forever from the Italian legal history not only by urgently changing the law system but mostly by switching off the bad attitude of the Italian people of not questioning the Prosecutor’s activity because of its divine nature.

http://www.examiner.com/ny-in-new-y...aele-sollecito-as-non-colpevoli#ixzz1WhlyhnY0

 

[SMK]

And from the appeals forum:

Amanda Knox Appeal: Knox Appeal Starts Up Again September 5th
September 1, 2011-

It's been a quiet summer for the Amanda Knox case, with the court starting back up this Monday, September 5th. I urge everyone to rally to the cause because this is the end of it. One way or another this case will close during the month of September with the anti-Knox factions still blowing smoke.

Expect to see someone the with initials F. M. to give it everything he's got to try and lessen the impact of the recent Knox victories which blew away the so called 'eye-witness' and DNA fairy-tale. Do not expect the prosecution to throw in the towel on this. These people do not do this- they should but they don't. They will remain defiant and poker-faced until the very end.

This is not an American cause, just because she happens to be American. This is a cause for everyone who hates injustice. And injustice is what this girl has had to swallow for almost four years. It's all going to end soon- I would say sometime this month (September) it's going to be over. And yes I really do believe that it is going to end in her favor. The most important reason I think so is because the head judge in this case is Judge Hellmann who has been directing this appeal in a very fair and balanced manner.

http://amandaknoxappealforum.blogspot.com/2011/09/amanda-knox-appeal-knox-appeal-starts.html

 

[Malkmus]

I don't think that is why he granted the independent review. Nowhere has he ever stated that.(snip)

This is what I am referring to:

The judge said he wanted to "establish exactly what the DNA evidence is"... in his ruling the judge referred to the Italian penal code which said that a "conviction could only be secured against an accused if it was beyond all reasonable doubt".
He said the refusal by the original court to refuse independent analysis of the DNA evidence, which defence lawyers had requested, had violated that principle.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...les-evidence-against-her-can-be-reviewed.html

What correlation exactly do you think the judge was drawing between reasonable doubt and review of the evidence, if not what I stated before?

 

[Malkmus]

Haven't seen testimony about the 6 and 12 day gaps between evidence testing and prior related evidence testing? It was in the news and discussed after the last hearing - don't remember the date ... earlier this summer. DNA can survive for decades, even on a bra clasp after it's been kicked around.

I read the article months ago ... a sterile environment is required. Is there anything to suggest that the lab used to test evidence leading to the conviction of Guede is not sterile? Weird huh, that the lab used to test evidence leading to the conviction of Knox and Sollecito is suddenly filthy but when it was used to convict Guede, it was sterile ... and all the testing was ongoing at the same time.

Knowing the police's track record, and all the mistakes documented by the independent experts, I wouldn't be surprised if mistakes were also made during the analysis of Rudy's evidence as well. You can throw all the forensics against him out and it doesn't make a lick of difference, since it isn't needed to place him at the scene of the crime.

 

[Malkmus]

And from the New York Examiner:


http://www.examiner.com/ny-in-new-y...aele-sollecito-as-non-colpevoli#ixzz1WhlyhnY0

What's particularly interesting about this article is that it is written by an Italian native journalist:

In the first place, thanks to this fractured system of things and the italian media brainwashing machine, I was almost convinced of the defendants guilty. Then, thanks to the defendants commitment in proving their innocence, we have learned that those forensic evidence on which the prosecution based their case were contaminated and that the credibility of some of the witnesses was contested.

And also when he writes:

In Italy instead: 1) none has access to the police reports except officials involved in the case 2) the press does not question the prosecutor’s activity. This is basically why Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are still under trial.

http://www.examiner.com/ny-in-new-y...aele-sollecito-as-non-colpevoli#ixzz1WjK3B1ND

 

[SMK]

What's particularly interesting about this article is that it is written by an Italian native journalist:



And also when he writes:




http://www.examiner.com/ny-in-new-y...aele-sollecito-as-non-colpevoli#ixzz1WjK3B1ND

yes, I realized that later, that he was an Italian writer.....most interesting....

 

[otto]

Knowing the police's track record, and all the mistakes documented by the independent experts, I wouldn't be surprised if mistakes were also made during the analysis of Rudy's evidence as well. You can throw all the forensics against him out and it doesn't make a lick of difference, since it isn't needed to place him at the scene of the crime.

If not forensics, what exactly placed Guede at the scene of the crime? I seem to recall that evidence at the scene led to his arrest in Germany.

Since everyone involved in the Italian justice system appears to be a bumbling fool, I suppose the Rome Experts must also be bumbling fools? ... or is everyone except these experts a bumbling fool?

 

[Malkmus]

If not forensics, what exactly placed Guede at the scene of the crime? I seem to recall that evidence at the scene led to his arrest in Germany.

Since everyone involved in the Italian justice system appears to be a bumbling fool, I suppose the Rome Experts must also be bumbling fools? ... or is everyone except these experts a bumbling fool?

Rudy Places himself at the scene of the crime during meredith's murder and has never denied it.

Bumbling fools are your words, but to clarify, I only criticize the work of those whose egregious errors have been documented. The independent exerts have made no such errors, and until someone gives me reason to question their credibility I won't.

 

[RoseMontague]

Haven't seen testimony about the 6 and 12 day gaps between evidence testing and prior related evidence testing? It was in the news and discussed after the last hearing - don't remember the date ... earlier this summer. DNA can survive for decades, even on a bra clasp after it's been kicked around.

I read the article months ago ... a sterile environment is required. Is there anything to suggest that the lab used to test evidence leading to the conviction of Guede is not sterile? Weird huh, that the lab used to test evidence leading to the conviction of Knox and Sollecito is suddenly filthy but when it was used to convict Guede, it was sterile ... and all the testing was ongoing at the same time.

I have read the transcripts of the 25 July hearing, but this one has not yet released. I am aware of the news reports but the actual testimony can differ significantly from the news reports. Take for example this passage from Burleigh's book quoting Comodi.

“The defense has been overly dramatic about this,” she explained, arguing against the defense request to toss out the case based on the fact that the crime lab hadn’t turned over all the paperwork involved in the DNA analysis. “No defense right has been threatened. We decide if documents are necessary or not. I didn’t even look at their request of July 30 [for the superwitness]. I opened it and closed it right away. It was so useless. No law says the scientific police have to produce all that’s requested. It’s not proof, and we didn’t need it to support our case. The prosecutor’s office decides what is useful and what is distraction. You can tell me that Stefanoni has to get another degree, but telling us that not producing the documents warrants tossing out the case is like asking the postal police to explain how they found a hooker online. The important thing is that they found the hooker!”

Yet if you read the actual court transcript from 14 September that I posted here a few days ago you will find quite a different version of what she said.

I have examined the actual SAL reports and compared them and matched them up to the test results posted at IIP. Although the SAL reports contain a handful of tests with no dates (the test results at IIP are dateless), it is plain to see from what is dated there is a weeks gap between the testing. This is something the defense will probably need to address.

 

[RoseMontague]

To address the second part of your argument, Rudy had admitted being there so his defense was not going to argue contamination as the reason for his DNA being present. That would be pointless. Stefanoni claimed there had been no incidents of contamination at the lab which from what I have seen should be a red flag. Scientists admit that contamination is found by actually testing for it in a number of ways including positive and negative controls and comparing unknown DNA that turns up in testing to a database containing those people doing the collecting and testing (ETA_as well as DNA of previous tests run in the lab).

Reviewing the test reports, Stefanoni gets up to Unknown male 8 at one point (IIRC) yet admitted the only profiles she had were from Amanda, Patrick, Rudy, Meredith, and Raffaele. The database she ran the Y chromosome result through was not one specific to the lab testers and forensic collectors. It is possible one of these unknown males could be the great Mignini hisself (LOL) (for all we know). If it turned up that one of these unknown males was actually one of the tester/collectors then you would have proven contamination. The lab refused to turn over the contamination logs to the defense so we don't even know if Stefanoni's claim is accurate to begin with.

 

[wasnt_me]

I've only seen a few luminol pictures over the years, I generally chose not to view them. I have to say though that I've never seen any that look as gloopy/globby/puddely for lack of better words (if these are even real words). Yes, I do see the luminol spatters on the techs boots and the ruler which screams to me contamination of the crime scene.

There also appears to be something lumpy a few inches lower than the straight ruler, and I can't make out what it is. It sorta looks like a brown cigarette butt, or small cat/dog poop, I dunno, just guessing here. Any thoughts?

:wagon::Welcome1:

Welcome--or welcome back--to the thread!

I have no idea what that is. I saw it, too, and was wondering. Maybe RG hadn't finished wiping himself. Oh, lawd!