Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #15

[Allusonz]

True ... no human activty with the computer could be confirmed from 8:40 until about 6 AM. Knox said that she had a shower at the cottage, but we don't know that - she has been untruthful throughout the investigation. We also have eyewitness testimony from Guede confirming that Knox and Sollecito were at the scene and committed the murder.

Wrong

The reason the police didn't include this in their own evidence appears to be that they accessed that file themselves when Raffaele's laptop was in their hands, then they turned around and gave the court a list of all the files that (according to the file system) were last accessed on the night of the murder in the time period they decided was relevant

As per Massei in the Motivational Report

that the judgment placed at 21:10:32 the last operation performed by Raffaele Sollecito in the day of 1 November 2007.

As per RS Appeal

Indeed, searching with Spotlight in version 10.4.10 was detected at least one file "Naruto ep 101.avi" which is not present in advice of the police post, but whose date of last opening is Thursday 1 November 2007 at 21:26 (ie in the period examined by the police Postal: 1st November 2007 18:00 - November 2, 2007 8:00 am). The date of their last (Tuesday, 6 November 2007 at 10:18:38) and last editing this file (Tuesday, 6 November 2007 at 13:28:09) corresponds to a period coinciding with the removal of the laptop from the home of Raffaele Dunning, during which activities are detected on that laptop witnessed by the file system logs.

I did not include the screensaver activity noted which is also in the appeal of RS

 

[wasnt_me]

Day one, Feb 2, 2011

All above people were there, and they received the evidence. Claimed it had been delivered and sealed well, though still the knife in cardboard. No observers made any declarations about it.

Day 2, Feb. 3, 2011

Everyone present. They outline what tests they planned to do and opened the evidence:

that context the experts holding forth the plan of work. in accordance with the medical-legal methodology. planned to carry out the laboratory tests on 36 Rep. and Rep. The 65B in the manner specified below:
1 generic diagnosis of blood). using colorimetric tests:
2) specific diagnosis of blood:
3 cell search using) specific staining and microscopic observation:
4) extracting DNA from each specimen;
5) DNA quantification by Real-time PCR. as required and
agreed with all the consultants.
In the minutes drawn up in that context it is noted that you give Act, by
everyone present. that both finds and named Rep. 36.165/b Rep are
sealed in single housing regularly and in particular the 36 nr 00015662 Rep.
stuck in cardboard box with the security seal, red nr.
0000179 and Rep. The 65/b nr 00012877 content in a test tube with red Cap.
as evidenced by documentation (iconographic performed the part of experts
appointed. You acknowledge that the Prof. Giuseppe Novelli moves away from home expert.

They then go into detail describing the knife. After they do that, they talk about the cleaning of the lab protocols and that the people are all wearing ET suits. They discuss the knife locations to be tested. Then they tested each knife area for blood. The results:

Were obtained the following results:
Generic diagnosis of blood:
Track negative reaction
Track B = negative reaction
Track C = negative reaction
Track D negative reaction
Track E = negative reaction
Track F negative reaction
Trace G = negative reaction
Track 11 = negative reaction
Track = negative reaction

Then they put it back in its original wrapper and cardboard box. I don't think they tested the starch this day.

 

[Allusonz]

Regarding the luminol prints

As per the testimony of Dr. Torre

Torre also pointed out that the luminol footprints that investigators say are of Knox's bare feet cannot be because Knox's second toe is longer than her big toe, and that characteristic is not apparent in the lumino-enhanced prints. He also pointed out that the bare footprints of the other two women who lived in the house were not taken for comparison, nor were those of the victim

http://abcnews.go.com/International/Story?id=8014386&page=2

 

[miley]

This sounds good:

Caso cuiso. Case over. Judges cannot convict if evidence is inconclusive, insufficient or contradictory according to section 930 of the Italian criminal code. Thanks to the report by Stefano Conti and Carla Vecchiotti from Rome’s Sapienza University, nothing ties Amanda and Raffaele to the blood-stained bedroom where Meredith Kercher, Knox’s British roommate, was stabbed to death on Nov. 1, 2007.

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/

Anyone know of this section of Italian criminal code that can discuss its affect on the new report?

from your link:

Here’s Oggi magazine’s scorecard, updated.

1. Rudy Guede
His Y chromosone found on a vaginal swab inserted (Note: by investigators) into the body of the victim.
His DNA on the left sleeve of the blue Adidas jacket worn by the victim.
His DNA on a brown, fake leather purse, discovered on Meredith’s bed, from which her cell phones were stolen.
His DNA on the straps of Meredith’s bra.
The imprint of his bloody hand on a pillowcase.
The bloody print made by his Nike Outbreak 2 shoes on the floor of the room.

2. Raffaele Sollecito
No trace.

3. Amanda Knox
No trace.​

Rudy's Y chromosone found on a vaginal swab inserted (Note: by investigators) into the body of the victim.

I know ..tampon is actually tampone in Italian meaning swab (however) the way I'm reading it here, she was wearing a tampon... could someone clarify?

 

[wasnt_me]

Miley I asked that before and almost got run off this board when I asked if MK was on her period.

Anyways, they mean "swab."

 

[Allusonz]

My understanding is that there are certain protocols that the academics allege were not followed by Dr Stefanoni. For example, regarding the LNC DNA, one of the criticisms is that the LNC DNA should have been tested in a different lab, rather than in the same lab. This is an extra step that is recommended in order to absolutely ensure that lab contamination cannot be a factor. This does not mean that lab contamination did occur, but that a step that is recommended to further advance the belief that it could not have occurred was not done.

We can start with this list

Stephanoni as I have pointed out did not use any sort of scientific protocol/procedure normally used. It is not even in the scientific writings on this. The nine areas that Stephanoni did not conform to standard protocols/procedures were:


1. The DNA wasn’t amplified enough; the very weak fluorescence was simply blown up.
2. The test site was not remote from other DNA tests to avoid contamination.
3. Specialized LCN-quality entry procedures to avoid contamination were not used.
4. A positive pressure environment was not maintained to exclude contamination.
5. Special LCN sterilization procedures to destroy errant DNA were not used.
6. The entire sample was consumed in a single test; no comparison of tests was possible.
7. No sample was retained for future reference. The test can never be reproduced.
8. No negative control tests were run to check for contamination.
9. No control tests to check for field contamination were performed


http://freeaman.001webs.com/pdfs/LCN_DNA_II.pdf

 

[Monzoo]

I started reading the DNA report. It reads like a diary, day by day of every little step they took with the evidence. So it's very, very detailed.

Glad someone is going over the details. (Not me!) Since we probably have a month with no new developments, you'll have plenty of time.

I am considering taking an Italian-style vacation from the case, which means I'll be in lurk mode until September. I may come out of hiding for really interesting stuff, though.

 

[Allusonz]

Again... accepted protocol FOR WHOM? Were these not discussed at the first trial anyway? I believe it/they were and the court accepted DrS's testimony on her testing methods and results. This is another analysis that does not agree, but once again that will be up to the court to decide.

Yes, proving contamination is problematic... but then again contamination is possible in EVERY instance of evidence. So that is a tough one for either side.

I am truly confused. This lab was not even certified at the time according to the standards set out in PRUM which all the other countries had signed in Europe. To date Italy still has not signed this as I have cited often

 

[otto]

I guess I have it all wrong.

Is the correct version of the facts that Knox and Sollecito were found guilty in the murder of Meredith Kercher on the basis of two pieces of evidence, that those two pieces of evidence have now been placed into question because contamination cannot be ruled out, and therefore, the two convicted murderers will now be released from jail?

Is that the correct understanding of this case?

 

[Allusonz]

Breakin Expert and Judge Micheli

"In his decision, Judge Micheli also noted that a burglar could easily throw the rock from the parapet next to the house and then climb up into the window. There was no reason to carry the rock up or throw it from the ground 20 feet below–as the prosecution contends in photo ops."

"Defense expert Francesco Pasquali shattered that popular climbing myth in the trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito this weekend. The retired forensics officer Pasquali used a video to demonstrate that a burglar could have thrown a 4 kg. rock through the window from the outside, not from the inside as the prosecution maintains"

http://blog.seattlepi.com/dempsey/2009/07/05/amanda-knox-she-didnt-fake-a-burglary/

 

[Allusonz]

from your link:

Here’s Oggi magazine’s scorecard, updated.

1. Rudy Guede
His Y chromosone found on a vaginal swab inserted (Note: by investigators) into the body of the victim.
His DNA on the left sleeve of the blue Adidas jacket worn by the victim.
His DNA on a brown, fake leather purse, discovered on Meredith’s bed, from which her cell phones were stolen.
His DNA on the straps of Meredith’s bra.
The imprint of his bloody hand on a pillowcase.
The bloody print made by his Nike Outbreak 2 shoes on the floor of the room.

2. Raffaele Sollecito
No trace.

3. Amanda Knox
No trace.​

Rudy's Y chromosone found on a vaginal swab inserted (Note: by investigators) into the body of the victim.

I know ..tampon is actually tampone in Italian meaning swab (however) the way I'm reading it here, she was wearing a tampon... could someone clarify?

Needs repeating Miley

 

[Allusonz]

wasnt_me

I have to give you some kudos. I believe many of us are spiritual in our own ways and I must state how terribly impressed and humbled I was to read your post regarding you talking with MK yet still finding justice for all involved

It takes very a very special person to do something like this while out walking a dog or while doing any other activity.

I believe in my heart that we are for the most part all looking for justice for MK. Two wrongs though don't make a right but your post brought things very quickly into perspective to remind us all why we are here

Thank you!!!

 

[wasnt_me]

Still day two, I think:

They describe the rusty bra clasp, then test it for blood:

Were obtained the following results:
Generic diagnosis of blood:
Track and negative reaction
Track M negative reaction
The results were detected photographically.

they say they did a negative control and have been changing gloves through process.

Appears to jump to March 22nd.

It gets complicated for me as they explain all their sterilization and what they are doing to extract samples for DNA testing.

They then start detailing all this information about their test kits and capabilities. They give out their methodolgy, perform the test, and yield analysis:

ANALYSIS OF THE SINGLES I) NA (SAMPLES A-M)
With regard to the samples A — M analysis for real-time PCR reveals a
amount of initial DNA very low with a maximum concentration of DNA
measurable equal to 0.005 ng/pi (5 pg/jil) sampled "I". The following schema shows the
measurements relating to individual samples tested in triplicate. Note that
an analysis conducted on internal control (1PC) does not highlight elements that may
suggest to an inhibition of the PCR reaction. In fact. the value of Ct on
the IPC is always in the range between 28-31, in line with what is expected. In
other words, the analysis cannot be ruled out the presence of reaction inhibitors
PCR can impair DNA amplification in individual samples
analyzed. Ia DNA concentration in most samples examined is
found to be determined (Undetermined).

There are several pages of charts that i don't understand then they call everybody back in for a meeting on April 4.

It's all very boring. I'm up to about page 30. And it's become evident to me that they took a lot of percautions and had everyone present for several, if not all, stages of this.

That includes Patricia, so I'm not sure what she can dispute, since she's standing there, watching it all. Seems if she observed and had seen soemthing done wrong, she would have run to Mig and the press with it.

 

[wasnt_me]

Glad someone is going over the details. (Not me!) Since we probably have a month with no new developments, you'll have plenty of time.

I am considering taking an Italian-style vacation from the case, which means I'll be in lurk mode until September. I may come out of hiding for really interesting stuff, though.

Uhm---WAS going over the details. :innocent:

It got boring and very scientific for me. Oh, enjoy the hiatus but I have a feeling you won't be able to resist coming around by the end of next month.

 

[wasnt_me]

wasnt_me

I have to give you some kudos. I believe many of us are spiritual in our own ways and I must state how terribly impressed and humbled I was to read your post regarding you talking with MK yet still finding justice for all involved

It takes very a very special person to do something like this while out walking a dog or while doing any other activity.

I believe in my heart that we are for the most part all looking for justice for MK. Two wrongs though don't make a right but your post brought things very quickly into perspective to remind us all why we are here

Thank you!!!

You're welcome. Walking the dogs on a good breezy night and standing on my porch, gazing at the twinkling sky. That's the best time to reflect. Although, I admit, I check the shadows for any RG's.

I said before I try not to think of MK because I get so upset, and I cry. I cry easily for her as all victims, becaus I know but for the grace of God go I. But last night, it felt good to cheer and be so happy, and In the middle of it, the first name I said was MK's when I was chanting about justice. It surprised me, because as I said, I try not to think of her, so I don't get upset.

Instead of getting upset that time, I got happy.

I do believe in spirits being around and was visited myself by some family members since past. My cousin did it to me a couple times, because I happen to have gotten his bed after he died. Well, anyways, I hope MK heard me, wherever she is, because the day was about her. Finding out the truth for her. And also about setting her friends free, because the innocent AK and RS were indeed her friends.

I can't believe I feel so much joy for people I don't even know, and for MK, who I can never even have a hope of knowing now.

 

[wasnt_me]

Okay, so then in May, the others were not present when the lab ran tests to discover if there was cell material on the two items. All they came up with was starch on the knife.

CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion there is no evidence of the presence of cellular material in the
samples analysed with the technique of staining and citocentrifugazione
ernatossilina. Some samples (A-E-F-H-I) and particularly the "H".
have granules with a characteristic morphology with circular/hexagonal
Central radiating structure. A more detailed microscopic study together with the consultation of data in the literature have made it possible to determine that the facilities in question are traceable to starch granules, so material
vegetable. Noting that in the walls (A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-l) made on Rep. 36
(knife) and cladding (L-M) run on Rep. The 65B (BRA hooks)
was this DNA useful for further investigation Laboratory (amplification.
the experts informed electrophoresis). verbally, consultants of the parties that would the examination conducted by the technical advice of forensic science, as well as to the question cormulato in the provision of expert.
Before aifrontare the second part of the question being posed deem appropriate bring some facts relating to the medical-legal methodology applied to tanks investigative. Click methodology is summarized in the following passages: i) define the scene
crime-2) modalitui of the rebuild done 3) collecting useful items to lìni
ID 4) sending of specimens in the laboratory for analysis.

So far, they got some useful DNA and some starch. Then they go on to investigative techniques starting around page 32.

 

[wasnt_me]

These are the guidelines by which they judge the investigative work on the case:

OVERVIEW on TECHNIQUES 1) 1 SURVEY and Dl EVIDENCE COLLECTING

It is considered appropriate, first, as is stated in Technical lnvestigative of the scene of the crime by Barry Fischer (Teclzniqiies of Needles Scene Investigation. Fischer — CRC and Burrj. 2003) regarding the proper approach
at the scene of a crime by the generic non-qualified personnel (Golden Rules) on What to do and what not to do at the scene (Crirne scenes Do and 007.27.09 Is). in order to avoid blunders and reduce the risk of contamination.
The starting point is always Locard's principle according to which two clicks
come into contact with each other Exchange of material under different forms.
In parallel the same principle holds the scientifically
contamination and alterations by anyone else. investigators included. Enter
in contact with the scene.

WHAT TO DO

-Limit the crime scene (primary and secondary);
-Annotate each modification of the scene due to their actions or of third parties;-Avoid introducing eontaminazionc (direct or indirect) inside the scene:
-Accurately record the position of the objects before you remove them
(warning: do not attempt to replace objects in the original position):-Pay attention to yourself as a source of contamination of evidence.
WHAT NOT TO DO
-Allow or perform an indiscriminate especially without access verbal display;
-Change the status of the sites;
-Move without precautions (DPI and navigation Procedures);
-No document access:
31
-Trust that other conditions originating them.
It stresses how important figure of the Coordinator (Crime Scenes Manager) that has the task of ensuring, in particular in complex crimes. the correct conduct of relief operations and documentation from the various members of the team and is able to manage the emergency situation through a corrected flow procedures (Crime Scene: scene specjflc Managenrent Members,. 1?. Sunon Wile, and 2009).

In this way you give, so even the correct procedures of delimitation
crime scene by adopting, as a result, different levels of containment to
fme to avoid possible conditions that can induce alterations of tests, including
including contamination.
Then define an area crucial outer perimeter, understood as containment. which occur. inside, a secondary containment area and then
primary, until the rise of crime scene investigation (Crime Scene) (Increasing Crkne Scenes Integrity by Multiple Creuiing Securily Levels. Greg Dagnan, Criminal.Jusiice Missouri Sowhenz Are. 2006).
Particular attention should be paid to the floor because this is the most
common place where you collect the evidence and at the same time is also the largest potential contamination (Protectlng the Crinte Scene. G. Schiro-Louisiana Be Police Crinze Laboralory).
Extremely guidelines are breaking the U.S. Deparimeni ofjusiice
-Office qf Jusike Programs. CHine Scene Investigation-A guide for Law
Enforcenvent, January 2000:
2. Control of contamlnazione:
-Contamination control and the prevention of cross-contamination
in a single or multiple scenes is essential to maintain the security of
staff and the integrity of evidence;
Restrict access to the scene
Follow established routes of entry and exit from the scene;32
-Designate an area for waste and safety equipment:
-Use of personal protective equipment (PPE) to prevent
contamination of personnel and to minimize contamination of the scene;
-Cleaning/Sterilizing or throwing tools/equipment and equipment
protective personnel between the evidence collecting evidence and/or between the different environments of scenes;
-Use single-use equipment when it is proceeding directly
the evidence collecting biological samples:
-To maintain the security of places throughout the procedure tino the definitive departure from the scene of the crime;
-Close the artifacts in order to avoid cross-contamination and contamination;
-Keep the evidence on the scene appropriately in order to avoid
degradation or loss.And yet, the update of these Guidelines dcii ' U8. Deparimeni of
Justice, (' rhyme Scene Investigation: a Law Enforcement Training, Refereiscefor, June
200, t. highlights protocols/procedures even more restrictive:
Esignare arealaree-I) separate wastes in the course of the investigation
on the scene;
-Establish area/areas as location for:
-Appoint a responsible for the waste removal:
-Ijtilizzare PPE (personal protective equipment) specific;
-Delete the PPF in the containers for the biohazard specitici;

Then they go on to reference Nella Guidance on the Production of Best Practice 4ianuals with in ENFSI, ref cod. Qcc-BPM-008, 01/05/2008, si evidenzia fra l’altro.

This goes on for a couple pages about preventing sample contamination.

I put in red what I KNOW they didn't do right just off the top of my head.

After that, they start criticing Patricia's report, but I gotta ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzz at this point.

 

[wasnt_me]

Oh, but does this look like they perserved the crime scene?

http://oi40.tinypic.com/f9oavd.jpg

I almost feel scared that this stuff will overturn RG's conviction! :maddening:

 

[miley]

wasnt_me: It's all very boring. I'm up to about page 30. And it's become evident to me that they took a lot of percautions and had everyone present for several, if not all, stages of this.

That includes Patricia, so I'm not sure what she can dispute, since she's standing there, watching it all. Seems if she observed and had seen soemthing done wrong, she would have run to Mig and the press with it.

I know it's boring but thanks for posting the results like this - makes it so much easier to read.

and remember, Alberto Intini, head of the Italian police forensic science unit, pointed out that unless contamination has been proved, it does not exist.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8601-500172_162-7167537-1.html?assetTypeId=30#ixzz1QpFqKmM9

 

[emyr]

I should say that just because I would acquit them doesn't mean the court will (obviously). I will say that I did NOT know, coming into this forum, that those two particular pieces of evidence were under review. I based my opinions on the case off of the Massei report, and it's the caveats present in that report that led me to feel that the three items I named were necesarry to convict. Of those three, two have been discounted. The third is not enough to convict for murder, in my personal opinion, but is enough to convict Amanda as an accessory (not Raffaelle).

The court could obviously find that the accumulation of the other 30 pieces of evidence means that they are guilty still. Specifically the court may find that the murder required more than one person, and the aggregate of the evidence concludes those additional persons must be Knox and Sollecito.