Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #15

[emyr]

From the Massai report:

[185] * With * respect * to * the * activity * of * searching * for * and * collecting * the * various * specimens, *she *emphasised *that *she *operated *according *to *selective *criteria, *as *it *was * not *possible *to *collect *everything. *Thus, *she *proceeded *by *first *giving *precedence *to * collecting * the * obvious * biological * specimens, * then * seeking * non-*‐‑obvious * biological * traces * and, * above * all, * potential * specimens * of * blood, * using * the * customary due care and precaution necessary to ensure optimal * preservation * of * the * crime * scene, * and * to * avoid * "ʺany * careless * handling * of * things * which * might * cause * contamination"ʺ * (page * 44, * transcripts); * the * purpose * of * this * was * both * to * protect * the * collector * who * might * come * into *contact *with *pathogenic *substances *and *to *protect *the *biological *specimens. *The * collector *"ʺmust *take *care *not *to *contaminate *any *possible *findings *and *traces *with *his * own * DNA...for * this * reason * he * uses * personal * protective * devices * which * are * gloves, * suits, *shoe-*‐‑covers *and *masks, *in *order *to *avoid *any *exchanges *between *himself *and * his * surroundings; * obviously * he * must * also * prevent * the * findings * from * contaminating * each *other"ʺ *and *to *this *end *"ʺeach *separate *specimen *or *trace *is *preserved...in *a *safety * bag"ʺ * (page * 45); * for * the * sample * gathering * phase * sterile * single-*‐‑use * material * was * used * such *as tweezers, scalpels and test tubes.
(sorry about all the asterisks)


As we know from the video, the last sentence is not true for the bra clasp.

 

[Nova]

Is it realistic or pro-guilt/pro-jury/pro-justice to recognize: It hasn't been ruled out that contamination was possible so it is the Knox/Mellas family's hope that the possibility of contamination will be interpreted as meaning that contamination occurred ... so the guilty pair should be released.

I'm hoping that the heros Dempsey, Fisher and all the other Hopkipians are ready to publish their critical analyses of the DNA report soon ... before the report is presented in court. Aren't these guys (Dempsey et al) fluent in Italian and following the case???

Sure. The defendants would no doubt like the court to declare that the knife and bra clasp are contaminated.

But that still fundamentally misstates the issue with a failure to use proper controls and procedures. I have trouble believing you don't understand the difference.

 

[Nova]

To suggest that my posts are increasingly desperate is like exposing your soft underbelly. Be careful about that.

The discussion of DNA is by no means over. We are eagerly awaiting the US experts to weigh in with an informed knowledge of the report. Doesn't that drive you nuts that the pseudo experts grab translations and google spoofs of the experts report ... but they have nothing to say themselves.

Do you think they might be sleeping or something? Why haven't the supposed US experts associated with the murder of Meredith Kercher said anything about the DNA report other than to grab other people's work? Don't they have anything to say, or are they unable to understand the report?

I honestly have no idea what you are complaining about here.

So people have relied on the experts appointed by the Court. You were fine with Court experts that said what you wanted them to say.

Since people are still translating the 150-page report, I don't know why you expect American experts to opine without being able to read the whole thing.

(ETA "soft underbelly" = nice metaphor. Alas, my "underbelly" is all too soft.)

 

[Nova]

So ... were protocols followed by the experts in Italy? You accuse the forensic experts and analysts of "cherry picking" evidence ... I can only assume that your expertise is superior ... what would you have done differently.

I am relying on the experts' report, translated and quoted by others here.

I claim no expertise in forensics.

 

[Nova]

So, are you someone that believes that there are only two pieces of evidence available from the investigation into the murder of Meredith Kercher, and that without this DNA all the murderers will or should go free?

I'm wondering why the critics that claim to know all about the case, and Italian, haven't said anything about the report except what they can plagiarize from the Perugiamurderfile website. Any thoughts?

Why are you playing these word games?

In the post of yours to which Malkmus responded, he acknowledges the possibility that the appellate court may find other evidence sufficient for a conviction, even if the knife and bra clasp are thrown out.

 

[Nova]

Who is translating the report? The Innocence Project? Ms Dempsey? Mr Uknown Fisher? The Italian guy whose website was shut down by google? Which of the US experts, so vocal and knowledgeable about the case, is translating the report?

It seems to me that none of the US experts has a clue about what is going on with the case and that without someone translating court documents, they have nothing to work with. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the self-claimed experts are completely dependent on people from Perugiamurderfile for their information.

Um, no. Of course foreign experts depend on results collected by Perugia LE.

Do you expect foreigners to somehow fly to Perugia and pick up crime scene evidence?

 

[Nova]

Well, I have recanted. Take a look at this: :razz:

http://maundygregory.wordpress.com/2011/07/14/raffaele-sollecito-and-the-y-haplotype-lottery/

I don't know who Mandy Gregory is or how reliable. But it certainly does matter how alleles attributed to RS got on the bra clasp. Maybe he just means it doesn't matter for the purposes of the specific argument he is making.

 

[OldSteve]

I don't know who Mandy Gregory is or how reliable. But it certainly does matter how alleles attributed to RS got on the bra clasp. Maybe he just means it doesn't matter for the purposes of the specific argument he is making.

I believe you have it correct when you said "it doesn't matter for the purposes of the specific argument he is making."....

At the top of the blog, Mandy says, "might have been the result of contamination. That’s something I’ll look at in my next post."

Now that's what I really want to read, since my contention with the way DNA has been used in this case is that it does not provide a time stamp as to when it got there, and since AK/RS/MK associated with one another, their DNA might appear anywhere around where they've been.

 

[wasnt_me]

Never thought of this scenerio and it would make perfect sense as I simply have a difficult time believing that RG went back to get the keys

I could go with the scenerio that in fighting with her and getting her on the floor, maybe he "accidentally" stabbed her. I know that sounds weird on the face of it, but image that he's just trying to hold her and he has the knife at her neck, just trying to threaten her into control; however, he doesn't intend to actually kill her. But she's fighting, so he's wounding in her with the less deep cuts. Of course that makes her fight more. They might have knocked the pillows and stuff onto the floor, slipped on something and as they fumbled to the floor, he stabs her fatally "on accident."

His shoe might have flown off in the scuffle and he got blood on his bare right foot. He limps into the bathroom to dip his foot in the bidet and to get the towels. He goes back to the bedroom, and tries to move her onto the pillow, where he steps in blood with the left shoe as he's turning her counter clockwise (just as the footprint pattern indicates). He then decides to rape her, but as he's doing so, he realizes that he actually stabbed her fatally, so he tries to staunch the bleeding with the towels. He gets more blood on himself and shoes in this effort.

He sees he can't help her, so he drops the towels, goes for the purse and keys and phone, tosses the cover over her, locks the door and leaves.

I read something else, can't remember where, that threw into doubt whether he needed a key to lock her room. I don't think this was ever a contention in the MOT report, because i don't remember reading from it that they think AK knew she needed Mk's keys to lock them room. I'll scan it again to be sure, but he could have taken the keys, thinking he'd return later...? We don't know if when AK found the front door open, that it was locked. I make a guess that he thought he closed the door and it locked behind him, but came open because it's a broken lock. He could actually have returned, saw the front door wide open and decided not to go back at all. I mean, it's possible he thought he'd go get a bag or something to tote things in and he'd go back for more items. Because I really don't think he planned to burglarize or rape that night.

I think he went there to visit his friends, and when they weren't home, he got the big idea to breakin. I actually believe he would have broken into the guy's apartment, but from what I understand, they have bars on all the windows and doors. I think he probably saw RF's shutters were open, and he went for it. I can conjecture more that he might have brought back a friend who had the dark car. They might have seen the door wide open and decided to leave. Then the tow truck pulled up and they had to sit there and wait so not to call attention to themselves.

Anyways, it's all conjecture, really. But I don't know about that car being in the driveway. I've seen some people theorize that it was RF. They were saying that it was just as likely that RF came home after it was over, and she discovered the body and locked the door. I don't believe that, though. I believe RG and maybe a friend were the only ones there.

 

[wasnt_me]

That wasn't what I gathered from the discussion there. What I gathered is some posters are saying that the report does not appear to disprove that Raffaelle's DNA is on there. The report states that Stefanoni should not have "cherry-picked" (my phrase) the data. i.e. she should not have selected the peaks which matched Sollecito's and ignored the peaks which did not match him.

The discussion goes on where some of the forum members said they see no problem with matching the peaks to the suspect, since the point of looking at the information is to see if it proves a suspicion.

The response to this is that this evidence is absolutely NOT to be used to prove a suspicion. The evidence is supposed to be an objective fact. A disinterested third party should be able to come up with the same profile.

The implication from the CONCLUSION of this new report is that a disinterested third party would NOT have come up with the same profile Stefanoni came up with.

I agree with Otto, however, that this discussion is complex because none of us DO know what the "standards" are for DNA testing and results. Using disposable tongs SEEMS like a very simple, standard practice, but perhaps it is not universally accepted.

That being said, doctors didn't used to wash their hands, and they killed a lot of people. Some common practices are dangerous. If disposable tongs are not widely used, then I don't think it takes an expert to surmise that one could transfer DNA from one place to the next.

IS Raffaelle's DNA conclusively on the bra clasp? What does the report say?[/QUOTE]

BBM

It states that a Y haloptype is present along with some others. There is a percentage of the population that would have this probably in the thousands. RS happens to have the Y (being male) haloptype. They are also pointing out that the one main one being MK's and the lower count ones cannot be excluded from contamination. In other words there are more than one profile on the clasp that would match alot of different people but cannot be said to be one person in particular. The reason it seems they cannot exclude contamination is that there are so many profiles showing and due to the collection methods and fact that it was not collected for 46 days, passed around, and was found in a different area than where it was original photographed. As well they picked it up, appeared to forget to photograph it and put it back down on the floor

Thanks. I'm not sure I understand who the Y halotype belongs to, as a group. What makes this percentage of people have the y halotype? Just wondering. The fact that you can get out of Perugia and into other italian cities certainly widens the "y" gene pools of suspects, though.

Also, I wonder if the act of putting new gloves on would cause a collector's DNA to get on the glove. Image putting the glove on when you have no gloves on. You'd probably use your mastered hand to put it on the weaker hand first. That makes the DNA from the hand you use the most get all over the outside of the first glove. Then you put the second glove on with that gloved hand. There you, transferrance.

Now imagine if a collector even picked up the clean gloves BEFORE taking off the old gloves? Or changed his gloves one glove at a time. So a hand might still have a dirty glove on while and he uses that hand to put the clean glove on the naked hand. See where i'm going with this?

Even in the best of instances, where you actually remove both gloves first, you'd have to clean your hands AGAIN before putting on new gloves. Because if you used your naked hands to remove the dirty gloves, there's still a chance for transferring evidence. After I saw the pictures of those filthy gloves on the floor that one time, I can believe these people were not prudent while they changed gloves.

Amazing.

 

[wasnt_me]

And in about 10 days, I hope to be doing this, for good reason: :razz::razz: But who knows? Who really can say at this point? :waitasec:

By the way, I do not know why TJMK forum claims that there "are no international standards or protocol for forensic testing." I have found online that there indeed exist International Forensic Science institutes and associations, all aimed at setting the highest standards for testing and protocol. If Perugia did not follow, that is to their detriment.

I don't understand why it's becoming adversarial. It should be about the truth for MK, AK, and RS, not about who gets to say "I told you so" in 10 days. I'm responding because this is your reply to someone who said they would be "reminding" you of something in 10 days. That's childish, IMO.

 

[miley]

I believe you have it correct when you said "it doesn't matter for the purposes of the specific argument he is making."....

At the top of the blog, Mandy says, "might have been the result of contamination. That’s something I’ll look at in my next post."

Now that's what I really want to read, since my contention with the way DNA has been used in this case is that it does not provide a time stamp as to when it got there, and since AK/RS/MK associated with one another, their DNA might appear anywhere around where they've been.

here is something Frank wrote:

Everybody now, understands that a piece of paper with a DNA profile written on it means nothing. It’s just a piece of paper, and the perception of a huge miscarriage of justice spreads around the world.
/
That piece of paper actually does mean something. It’s really a grave indication of guilt… but for the ones who produced it.

Logic says that DNA can’t be on the knife and can’t be on the bra clasp. If there is, it must be a lab mistake, a contamination in the machine. Or a contamination in the room for the bra clasp, where, for 46 days, it was overlooked. These were the things we were saying when we were playing dumb, when we were pretending not to understand. If, instead, it’s not a lab mistake and contamination, there’s only one other possible option…
http://perugiashock.com/2011/01/22/cards-on-the-table-on-the-knox-sollecito-trial/
​

 

[Nova]

I fully expect to be accused of being a sore loser if the court concludes that RS' DNA is on the bra clasp. But, frankly, I've always been suspicious that the only RS DNA in the crime room is on that tiny piece, found so long after the fact, while cameras were broadcasting live over the internet.

Accidental contamination is the kindest interpretation, I think.

Misreading the results is the second kindest.

 

[SMK]

I don't understand why it's becoming adversarial. It should be about the truth for MK, AK, and RS, not about who gets to say "I told you so" in 10 days. I'm responding because this is your reply to someone who said they would be "reminding" you of something in 10 days. That's childish, IMO.

Oh, I was only kidding around..........

 

[wasnt_me]

FYI, they're also going by this protocol book:

Also from ENFSI – to which the Scientific Police Service of Rome and the Carabinieri of Rome belong – precise working directions are given in the document European Crime Scene Management: Good Practice Manual.

Sounds like an international investigative protocol book to me.


Independent researchers say they referred to the European Crime Scene Management: Good Practice Manual:

http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/...otes-on-inspection-and-collection-techniques/

Still looking for it on the web, but Italy belongs to this European accrediation group:

http://www.european-accreditation.org/content/ea/europNetwork.htm

http://www.european-accreditation.org/content/ea/members.htm



and this is what they say about Crime Scene Investigation:

http://www.european-accreditation.org/n1/doc/ea-5_03.pdf

 

[wasnt_me]

Oh, I was only kidding around..........

I know you were.

:crazy:

Others, though, seem too personally invested in being right versus finding the truth.

 

[miley]

Thanks. I'm not sure I understand who the Y halotype belongs to, as a group. What makes this percentage of people have the y halotype? Just wondering. The fact that you can get out of Perugia and into other italian cities certainly widens the "y" gene pools of suspects, though.

Also, I wonder if the act of putting new gloves on would cause a collector's DNA to get on the glove. Image putting the glove on when you have no gloves on. You'd probably use your mastered hand to put it on the weaker hand first. That makes the DNA from the hand you use the most get all over the outside of the first glove. Then you put the second glove on with that gloved hand. There you, transferrance.

Now imagine if a collector even picked up the clean gloves BEFORE taking off the old gloves? Or changed his gloves one glove at a time. So a hand might still have a dirty glove on while and he uses that hand to put the clean glove on the naked hand. See where i'm going with this?

Even in the best of instances, where you actually remove both gloves first, you'd have to clean your hands AGAIN before putting on new gloves. Because if you used your naked hands to remove the dirty gloves, there's still a chance for transferring evidence. After I saw the pictures of those filthy gloves on the floor that one time, I can believe these people were not prudent while they changed gloves.

Amazing.

I've been reading some of Franks old entries - bummed that so much is still missing -- but speaking of haplotypes, I thought the part regarding Rudy was interesting:

In other words we go to the crime scene, we pick what we like, we discard what we don’t like, and the case is solved. Have you seen how simple it is? That’s how they probably do at FBI.

Here, instead, we admit everything, no problem. Low copy number DNA and even what is inferior to that, such the one that people call Rudi’s DNA on the victim (which, instead, is not even a genetic profile, being just a haplotype of the Y-chromosome shared by who knows how many males with a common ancestor). We admit even weak evidence, with not fear, but we try to understand its meaning.
http://perugiashock.com/2010/09/10/amanda-knox-case-solved-on-tv/​

 

[wasnt_me]

Thanks, Miley!

And as I was looking up that European protocol book, I ran across some posts on the randi RJEF board that pointed out what I was saying before. I'd said the crime scene had probably been broken into before the bra clasp was rediscovered.

Over there, they show some pictures a blogger took sometime between the crime date and November 14th, where the front door appears to have come open from behind the "sealed" crime tape. The crime tape is very flimsy, and if I wanted to get in there, I'd just untie it and walk in, basically.

Then they showed a picture of the investigators putting a 'heavier' tape around a sign on the door, which they believe indicates they were retaping after someone did just what I said. But I don't know that I'd go that far with the theory, but I do think, seeing as that door just comes open like that, someone probably did remove the tape and go in there. That could be a reason that other DNA is on the bra clasp.

Additionally, this breaks the rule of not sealing off the crime scene appropriately and it strenghthens my theory that RG thought he locked/closed the door and it came back open on its own.

JREF Forum - View Single Post - Continuation Part 2 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case

http://lastrada.blogspot.com/2007/11/perugia-crime-scene-14-november-2007-as.html

http://i.imgur.com/ZodVV.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BZD30a25F.../s1600-h/Perugia+crime+scene+-+front+door.jpg

 

[emyr]

Well, I have recanted. Take a look at this: :razz:

http://maundygregory.wordpress.com/2011/07/14/raffaele-sollecito-and-the-y-haplotype-lottery/

Wow, I didn't understand that before. So 13 of Sollecito's allelles were found on the clasp. The internets say 16 is an absoute certainty, and anything over 12 is extremely likely. If you find 16, and you find 4 more that don't match, you would assume the other 4 were part of a second DNA sample, NOT that the profile is of someone else. Am I understanding it correctly?

So then it appears fairly definitive that Sollecito's DNA was in fact the result? And that means the defense must prove it occurred because of contamination (or because it was planted).

Am I right?

 

[wasnt_me]

Here's the transcript of the rudy hearing. I got it from IIP:

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/miscellaneous/testimony_06_27_11.pdf