Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#6

[MichaelSmith]

There aren't 5 or 6 males. There is definitely one extra which is not so strange since she had a boyfriend. Dr Balding mentions 4 extra peaks. More than one is already speculation. Despite all the leading questions by the interviewer, Dr Balding was very clear that there is not a problem, and a few extra peaks is completely routine. He was even mentioned by the prosecutor.

http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2013/07/an-interview-with-david-balding.html

http://www.frontiersin.org/journal/10.3389/fgene.2013.00177/full

The hypothesis formulated by the scientific police technical consultant about the nature of the material collected from the clasp is thus arbitrary, since it was not supported by any actual findings. After examining the electropherograms obtained from the autosomal STR analyses, the Appellate Court experts were able to assert that, for the markers D8S1179, D21S11, D19S433, D5S818, allelic peaks were interpreted in a manner that did not conform to the recommendations made in current literature/practice. In particular, peaks were considered to be stutters whose heights were above 50 RFU (D19S433), exceeded the threshold of 15% of the major allele (D8S1179, D21S11, D5S818), or were not in a stutter position (D5S818), and thus should have been considered to be alleles (Gill et al., 2006). The DNA extracted from the bra clasp thus indicates the presence of several minor contributors, which was not disclosed by the scientific police. The electropherograms obtained from Y-STRs analysis also showed (besides the peaks designated as alleles in the technical report of the scientific police) the presence of additional peaks with heights exceeding the threshold of 50 RFU (Table 1). Despite not being in a stutter position, they were not taken into consideration. Instead, the report(ing) was limited to what was in agreement with the observations on the electropherograms of the autosomal STRs. The genetic profile thus derived from a mixture of unidentified biological substances, whose larger component corresponded to the profile of the victim and whose smaller components suggest the contribution of several male sources. Defendant Raffaele Sollecito showed a profile that was compatible with the profiling results for the trace found on the bra clasp. However, considering the particular circumstances under which the item was recovered and collected, it could not be ruled out that the results obtained from the analysis of the bra clasp derived from environmental contamination and/or contamination in some phase of the collection and/or handling of the item.


Reviewed by:
Joelle Vuille, University of California, Irvine, USA
David Balding, University College London, UK

ETA: Just a reminder this is a key piece of evidence they either destroyed or through utter incompetence allowed to rust.

 

[sherlockh]

I distinctly remember Conti and Vecchiotti writing about several contributors. Ah, here it is:

http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/

So it looks like there were more males than just Raffaele and (hypothetically) the boyfriend. Chris Halkides who reviewed the graphs also confirms this finding of the independent experts, IIRC.

What baffles me is that all that many profiles landed on the very tiny spot which is one of the metal hooks. I'd expect boyfriend's DNA to be on the fabric part of the clasp, or the fabric of the bra itself. What are the chances so many people touched the tiny hook and avoided leaving any DNA on the fabric? I can't find any sensible explanation for this.

Ok, so now we jump from '5 or 6' to 'several'. What is it? 4 Disputed peaks does not mean 4 DNA profiles. That is not a DNA profile, and no indication of it being touch DNA. I completely agree with dr. Balding. 'Not a problem.'

 

[Katody]

Ok, so now we jump from '5 or 6' to 'several'. What is it? 4 Disputed peaks does not mean 4 DNA profiles. That is not a DNA profile, and no indication of it being touch DNA. I completely agree with dr. Balding. 'Not a problem.'

I was going by memory when I wrote 5 or 6. Conti and Veccchiotti indicated several. It means 3 or more if I'm not mistaken. Hardly a jump.

Dr. Balding who reviewed and accepted Conti's article seems to not disagree with the assessment.

4 Y haplotype peaks in one locus does mean 4 different males contributed, even if we don't have their full profiles, that's the point.

If the additional DNA is not from touch then how and where did it transfer from? Was it just floating around?

 

[otto]

You can't compare it directly. In case of the suction property of the mat and blurring the the result of this measurement is not reliable.

The great difference is the missing gap. This fact can't be ignored.

Would you be able to mark on the illustration the point where there is a missing gap? I'm not clear on which area is in question.

 

[otto]

Both of those footprints match the stain. There is no reason to believe the blood covered the foot. The foot may also have moved when on the ground, in which case the stain would cover a larger area. Also, the carpet is an uneven surface which can deform, none of which would be reflected in the static prints.

In other words the footprint is a match for Guede. Since we know for sure that he was there at the time of the murder, it is reasonable to conclude that on the balance of probabilities that the footprint belongs to Guede.

Don't the dimensions match Sollecito?

 

[otto]

The images originally come from the court documents, namely Rinaldi's report. What is important, the arrows and numbers in them are original Rinaldi's work.

Thanks for posting them because what is evident from these images is the very arbitrary way Rinaldi "measured" the prints.

Take a look especially at the vertical "37 mm" arrow in Sollecito's print. What does it actually measure? Why does it reach beyond the actual toe print? Is it because the bloody print has a much longer toe?

Look at the horizontal "30 mm" arrow in the bathmat print. Why does it reach well outside the toe print edge on the right side? Is it because Sollecito's toe is much wider then the bloody print?

It seems to me there was an effort by Rinaldi to stretch the numbers to fit Sollecito in. It may look plausible on a spreadsheet table but one glance at the actual photos and it's obvious it's Guede's foot and Sollecito is not a match at all.

I could darken the image to make the two points of measurement easier to see.

 

[otto]

Do you think he walked out of the cottage and down the street with bloody hands and blood on his clothes?



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...redith-Kercher-murder-Rudy-Guede-profile.html

I think he ran all the way to his apartment. I don't think he stopped to wash his clothes at the cottage, and I don't see how putting water on his pants while he was wearing them would improve his situation.

It seems that Sollecito's DNA can either fly, or stick to everything and become secondary (or third) transfer to Meredith's underwear, Knox's DNA is apparently everywhere so when it is mixed with Meredith's blood, it means Meredith's blood fell on her DNA, but with Guede, we should expect that he washed himself and his clothing in the small bathroom and he left no DNA or evidence of himself?

To believe that, we have to accept that he left fingerprints, footprints and DNA on one side of the wall, but when he moved to the other side of the wall (with no evidence of how he got there), suddenly he stopped leaving fingerprints, DNA and footprint?

 

[SMK]

The images originally come from the court documents, namely Rinaldi's report. What is important, the arrows and numbers in them are original Rinaldi's work.

Thanks for posting them because what is evident from these images is the very arbitrary way Rinaldi "measured" the prints.

Take a look especially at the vertical "37 mm" arrow in Sollecito's print. What does it actually measure? Why does it reach beyond the actual toe print? Is it because the bloody print has a much longer toe?

Look at the horizontal "30 mm" arrow in the bathmat print. Why does it reach well outside the toe print edge on the right side? Is it because Sollecito's toe is much wider then the bloody print?

It seems to me there was an effort by Rinaldi to stretch the numbers to fit Sollecito in. It may look plausible on a spreadsheet table but one glance at the actual photos and it's obvious it's Guede's foot and Sollecito is not a match at all.

So if as has been said elsewhere and as the defense will surely strongly argue in 2 weeks time: the MK dna on the knife is not valid or at least strongly compromised, the luminol footprints are in dispute, and the bathmat print belongs statistically to Guede; along with questioning of the simulation and of moving of the body scenarios- how is the escalating fight over an unflushed toilet going to stand with the lay judges? I guess I am a bit miffed that the murderwiki proved to be not nearly as solid in its compilation of evidence as I had thought it to be. Really don't know what to think or expect at this point.

 

[otto]

I've pushed the reds and yellows on this one. I found the original images in a google image search, but MichaelSmith has said that they are from the Rinaldi report.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Chris, someone yesterday said the reason why there is blood but not DNA is because of the white blood cells (or red, I am not sure which). Given your biochemistry background what is your view? Can you have blood without DNA? Why no MK DNA here and is that significant that there is no MK DNA?

Among body fluids lood is relatively rich in DNA, despite the fact that it is found in the white cells (the red cells outnumber the white cells by about 800-1000 to one). I have never seen a study which tried to perform luminol and DNA tests on serial dilutions of blood, which would settle the matter. Therefore, any claims to the effect that luminol is more sensitive than DNA profiling are speculative. Nevertheless, I have never heard anyone make such a claim, except in this case. There are papers which show that it is quite possible to extract a DNA profile from a luminol-positive spot. Therefore, we know that it is possible to obtain DNA from luminol-positive stains.

If the pro-guilt version of the knife is to be believed, DNA profiling must have a lower limit of detection that is lower than TMB testing for blood, yet now we are to believe that the lower limit of detection for DNA is higher than it is for luminol? I am not buying it.

 

[Yellow]

So if as has been said elsewhere and as the defense will surely strongly argue in 2 weeks time: the MK dna on the knife is not valid or at least strongly compromised, the luminol footprints are in dispute, and the bathmat print belongs statistically to Guede; along with questioning of the simulation and of moving of the body scenarios- how is the escalating fight over an unflushed toilet going to stand with the lay judges? I guess I am a bit miffed that the murderwiki proved to be not nearly as solid in its compilation of evidence as I had thought it to be. Really don't know what to think or expect at this point.

I think to form an opinion, look at murder wiki, then look at one of the defense sites to see what the response is, then form your opinion. I always thought defense site gave a good reason for something in murder wiki.

 

[Yellow]

Ok, so now we jump from '5 or 6' to 'several'. What is it? 4 Disputed peaks does not mean 4 DNA profiles. That is not a DNA profile, and no indication of it being touch DNA. I completely agree with dr. Balding. 'Not a problem.'

There is multiple unidentified DNA on that bra, where they even made the argument I believe it could be anyone, even the judges themselves

I do not think they tested it to eliminate MK boyfriend, that would be easy enough to do. Why didn't they even bother to do that.

Multiple unexplained DNA on that bra clasp points to contamination, they probably never tested female DNA but I would not be surprised if it was one of the other roommates, whose DNA could have been messed in w that pile of stuff. Or possibly one of the technicians

 

[Chris_Halkides]

There aren't 5 or 6 males. There is definitely one extra which is not so strange since she had a boyfriend. Dr Balding mentions 4 extra peaks. More than one is already speculation. Despite all the leading questions by the interviewer, Dr Balding was very clear that there is not a problem, and a few extra peaks is completely routine. He was even mentioned by the prosecutor.

<modsnip>
http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.com/2013/07/an-interview-with-david-balding.html

Dr. Balding did not examine the YSTR results in his paper (his methodology is not applicable to it IIUC). However, I have examined the YSTR electropherogram in question. There are between 2-4 additional male contributors (meaning three to five male contributors in total), depending on the size of peaks one accepts and on how one treats possible stutter peaks. For Stefanoni to leave this fact out of her analysis is...astonishing.

 

[Myvice]

Rudy Guede's German diary attached.

On page 4 of the diary he says he washed his hands in the sink at home because they were so bloody and changed his pants because that was all that was dirty.

It doesn't say, IMO, that he washed his hands and pants at Merideth's flat. Am I missing something?

 

[otto]

Among body fluids lood is relatively rich in DNA, despite the fact that it is found in the white cells (the red cells outnumber the white cells by about 800-1000 to one). I have never seen a study which tried to perform luminol and DNA tests on serial dilutions of blood, which would settle the matter. Therefore, any claims to the effect that luminol is more sensitive than DNA profiling are speculative. Nevertheless, I have never heard anyone make such a claim, except in this case. There are papers which show that it is quite possible to extract a DNA profile from a luminol-positive spot. Therefore, we know that it is possible to obtain DNA from luminol-positive stains.

If the pro-guilt version of the knife is to be believed, DNA profiling must have a lower limit of detection that is lower than TMB testing for blood, yet now we are to believe that the lower limit of detection for DNA is higher than it is for luminol? I am not buying it.

Wasn't the sample recently used to identify Knox on the knife smaller than the sample used to identify Meredith's DNA on the blade?

 

[SMK]

I've pushed the reds and yellows on this one. I found the original images in a google image search, but MichaelSmith has said that they are from the Rinaldi report.

I don't know the exact science of the various measurements, but to the naked eye, this looks like Sollecito print (even though if you do not look more closely, at first sight it could be the Guede one).

 

[Yellow]

Was it a California jury that recently acquitted a woman of murder on the basis that secondary transfer was all over the crime scene that was set to explode, and she was never in the house? Her DNA was everywhere, so police throuht they had a slam dunk case and were not prepared for the multiple secondary transfer argument.

The video of the evidence collection at the cottage does not explain a crucial piece of evidence: Meredith's DNA on Sollecito's knife (and his story about the dinner party). Although contamination of Sollecito's DNA on the bra clasp at the crime scene is plausible, the DNA has to come from somewhere; it has to make sense ... and that is where the argument breaks down.

We know that DNA on the clasp is not a result of contamination at the lab (contamination also ruled out by Conti and Vecchioti), and it's unlikely that the DNA flew from the ashtray in the kitchen down the hall into Meredith's bedroom and landed on the bra clasp. Gloves were changed between the two properties, so that is not a possible source for contamination. Where did Sollecito's clasp DNA come from if not direct touch and not secondary transfer?

The cigarette butt in the kitchen is not a DNA source for secondary transfer. The cigarette butt did not touch the bra clasp (secondary transfer), instead DNA supposedly transferred from the cigarette butt to the gloves and then to the bra clasp. The DNA on the clasp is a strong, undisputed sample. The only concern I'm aware of relates to static that can be interpreted as additional sample types ... but I'm not convinced that static means that there are 3-4 additional male DNA profiles on the clasp.

We know RG touched the door knob when he tried to break the door down. Technicians also did this, possibly without changing gloves

The bra was also moved several times as evidenced by the video. I am not sure what of AK was in that pile. If her clothes or underwear, RS would have been all over that.

The problem w the knife is you are relying on low copy DNA, which was done by a lab not credited to do it and which as far as I know not admissible in cases bc it is too unreliable. The lab was teaming in MK DNA. Given the lab I believe was not credited to do DNA evidence, I do not find it a stretch if they did not follow procedures

And people forget there are a few big problems w that knife, first there is no blood, which makes no sense and I have never gotten a pro guilty side to ever explain how that is possible. They just ignore that very important point. Second, cuts don't match that specific knife to the exclusion of many knives. Third, there should at least be MK low copy DNA all over that knife. The fact it is only one itty bitty places raises the Spector of contamination

There is a reason the machine blares out "too low" when they did the test on the knife. The machine could not do an accurate reading on that DNA and given the lab was not certified to do DNA testing, we are not certain it was even doing the test right. You don't even need to get to contamination to discredit the knife IMO

Would you trust the results of a medical test from a lab not certified to do the testing? No, with your own health, you would go to another lab. You would think you might have w false positive or a false negative in an unaccredited lab. You would double check the results, not accept them at face value and take expensive pills bc the unaccredited lab said you has a disease.

The knife and bra IMO will be thrown out. As even the judge said there is no reason C&V are unreliable. That is why the circumstantial case was emphasized more by the prosecutor, he knows this is likely.

 

[Sigh Sister]

On page 4 of the diary he says he washed his hands in the sink at home because they were so bloody and changed his pants because that was all that was dirty.

It doesn't say, IMO, that he washed his hands and pants at Merideth's flat. Am I missing something?

Also on page 4, he states his pants were wet. He doesn't say how they became wet, however.

(no idea how the lightbulb got in my post)

 

[Katody]

I don't know the exact science of the various measurements, but to the naked eye, this looks like Sollecito print (even though if you do not look more closely, at first sight it could be the Guede one).

It looks like Guede's to me. The same dimensions and shape of the big toe. Sollecito's toe is triangular and wide, Guede's elongated just like the bloody print.

 

[Yellow]

Dr. Balding did not examine the YSTR results in his paper (his methodology is not applicable to it IIUC). However, I have examined the YSTR electropherogram in question. There are between 2-4 additional male contributors (meaning three to five male contributors in total), depending on the size of peaks one accepts and on how one treats possible stutter peaks. For Stefanoni to leave this fact out of her analysis is...astonishing.

I think that raises the possibility of contamination or else MK had a lot of male friends touching that bra, which we think is unlikely.

It could also be there were 5 people in the murder room, the three plus 3-4 other strange males. Why doesn't the prosecution add more people to their story and say you have AK and 5 men fighting over the cleaning? If they want to add RS why not add these strange men too?