Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #18

[SMK]

From Frank Sfarzo today, Perugia Shock:

Stefanoni, self defense carried out in a good way: admissions and explanations.
She admitted to having used the girls’ fridge, just like nothing.
She explained why she wrote on her report that the knife was tested with Real Time PCR (instead it was done with fluorimeter, being the Real Time machine out of order): “My mistake”.
Or why she didn’t report the quantity of DNA: “I forgot”.
Or why she didn’t provide the raw data “They weren’t in the prosecution file”.
Or why the lab wasn’t accredited: “Ask the director”.
She explained many interesting things (the contamination, the test sensibility, the stochastic effect, the PCR, the stutter formation, the background noise, the cut-off threshold, the raw data&#8230, often in a more complete way than how C&V did.

She also advertised herself: she revealed she trains herself by buying profile-reading exercises and she always gets an A.

Perhaps she’s a bit approximate on the crime scene, where she’s lost if the fridge isn’t working, where she cancels footprints completely, where she spreads blood around, where she rubs swabs with her hands, where she agitates underwear in the air, where she puts samples in plastic bags…. That’s not really her fault, since probably nobody taught her how to move around a crime scene. But she’s great at pure DNAing. Trust me, she should have remained at the university.

It just so happens that the university in Italy is for rich kids, you don’t really get paid for researching there. So, she made her choice and she entered the police. Now she has a salary, but she’s a cop –a biologist with a gun. Others are scientists.

It would be beautiful to talk about all these DNA issues in a peaceful manner. Instead, everything has to be done with anger, with fear, in the rush, with the cops around bothering the undesired observers. And even a scientific debate becomes boring.

It becomes horrible, seeing that team of people who have the not-really-noble purpose of ruining the life of a girl and a boy.

http://perugiashock.com/

 

[Allusonz]

That seems to be what happened. The Rome Experts found DNA on the blade and had the specific machines and facilities to test it. Instead, they decided not to attempt to identify the DNA because it was low number count DNA. The Rome Experts also agreed that the previous test done by Dr Stefanoni, which was a match (with low peaks on the readout), could be a match to Meredith. As it stands, the Rome Experts have not said that the DNA on the blade of the knife did not belong to Meredith, but have rather argued that it was LNC DNA and too small to test ... but they didn't try to test it. Judge Hellman asked them to review European Protocols regarding LNC DNA, but they did not do this. Instead they referenced something called "International Protocols", which do not exist. It is of interest to note that the Knox advocates that objected to the DNA have referenced "International Protocols".

In terms of explaining the knife blade DNA that was identified by Dr Stefanoni as a match to Meredith, the Rome Experts suggested that contamination could have occurred. However, during the hearings in early July, it was revealed that the testing of the DNA on the knife blade was done several days after any other DNA from the scene was tested, making it rather impossible that there were still trace elements of the DNA on the machines. It has not been suggested that there was cross contamination in the lab, only that the machines could have been dirty. Given the time lapse between when the knife DNA was tested and other related evidence was tested, dirty machines have pretty much been ruled out. The only other place for contamination would be during collection, but Meredith had never been to Sollecito's apartment, so there is no possibility that it was contaminated at the apartment. This pretty much rules out contamination.

Essentially, that leaves the DNA test that was done by Dr Stefanoni, and that was matched to Meredith's DNA. The Rome Experts had the opportunity to test a small sample that they found, but they didn't do it. It's possible that the prosecution will appeal to have this sample tested.

The experts performed 9 tests not including the ones for starch or bleach on the knife the results below thus I am uncertain how anyone can state that the experts did not test this knife:

"The following results were obtained:

Generic test for blood

Trace A = negative reaction
Trace B = negative reaction
Trace C = negative reaction
Trace D = negative reaction
Trace E = negative reaction
Trace F = negative reaction
Trace G = negative reaction
Trace H = negative reaction
Trace I = negative reaction

The results obtained were documented photographically.

On these same areas, then, samples were taken using sterile swabs (in individual sealed packaging, opened at the very moment of sampling), damp with sterile bidistilled water.

Nine samples were taken, of which seven corresponded to the areas already examined by Dr. Stefanoni (letters A-B-C-D-E-F-G) and two corresponded to the point of contact — not analyzed by Dr. Stefanoni — between the blade and the handle of the knife (letters H-I)."

 

[sherlockh]

The experts performed 9 tests not including the ones for starch or bleach on the knife the results below thus I am uncertain how anyone can state that the experts did not test this knife:

"The following results were obtained:

Generic test for blood

Trace A = negative reaction
Trace B = negative reaction
Trace C = negative reaction
Trace D = negative reaction
Trace E = negative reaction
Trace F = negative reaction
Trace G = negative reaction
Trace H = negative reaction
Trace I = negative reaction

The results obtained were documented photographically.

On these same areas, then, samples were taken using sterile swabs (in individual sealed packaging, opened at the very moment of sampling), damp with sterile bidistilled water.

Nine samples were taken, of which seven corresponded to the areas already examined by Dr. Stefanoni (letters A-B-C-D-E-F-G) and two corresponded to the point of contact — not analyzed by Dr. Stefanoni — between the blade and the handle of the knife (letters H-I)."

Otto mentions the DNA that they found and was not further tested. Nowhere he mentions any blood.

 

[otto]

The video shows the downstairs police break in actually occurred on 2 November. The interesting thing is Mignini and Stefanoni were observing.

That's right. They investigated the entire cottage on the day the murder was discovered ... including the downstairs apartment. It didn't happen a couple of days later.

 

[otto]

otto,

In which cases of DNA contamination is the exact route and moment of contamination known and in which cases is it unknown? If more of Raffaele's DNA had been found in Meredith's room, would the prosecution be conceding now that contamination could have happened with respect to the clasp? If DNA can persist for years on evidence samples, then why is the alleged six-day gap significant? Given the number of stories the prosecution has presented with respect to negative controls, why should we believe what they have to say about this gap, anyway?

Contamination may have occurred when the second officer, who had just been to the girls' flat, handled the knife. Given the lack of blood on the knife and the presence of starch, contamination is the most reasonable explanation.

The negative controls were never requested by the Rome Academics, but they were always available. The Judge is currently making a decision about admitting them. The Rome Academics have agreed that there were 6 and 12 days intervals in testing the evidence (that happened in the July hearings).

DNA doesn't sit on DNA testing machines for years.

 

[otto]

That is true. Who was she winking at by the way?

It looks to be someone sitting to her left, in the same area where Sollecito always sits

http://tv.repubblica.it/cronaca/perugia-amanda-e-l-occhiolino-a-raffaele/75381?video

 

[SMK]

It looks to be someone sitting to her left, in the same area where Sollecito always sits

http://tv.repubblica.it/cronaca/perugia-amanda-e-l-occhiolino-a-raffaele/75381?video

I think this link will make it a lot clearer to you, what transpired:

http://multimedia.lastampa.it/multimedia/in-italia/lstp/77429/

 

[joedotnet]

okay, i've loosely watched this case...and am trying to get caught up on the evidence, etc. What is the consenus on WS...innocent?

 

[sherlockh]

okay, i've loosely watched this case...and am trying to get caught up on the evidence, etc. What is the consenus on WS...innocent?

Mmhh..there is a poll somewhere..about 50-50 last time I checked.

 

[joedotnet]

the nagging question i have...why implicate the boss if innocent..more reading to do.

 

[Allusonz]

Otto mentions the DNA that they found and was not further tested. Nowhere he mentions any blood.

As per the experts report:

"- The quantification of the extracts obtained from the samples obtained from item 36 (knife) and item 165B (bra clasps), conducted via Real Time PCR, did not reveal the presence of DNA."

"- In view of the absence of DNA in the extracts that we obtained, with the agreement of the consultants for the parties, we did not proceed to the subsequent amplification step."

http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/contents/conclusions-2/

 

[Allusonz]

The negative controls were never requested by the Rome Academics, but they were always available. The Judge is currently making a decision about admitting them. The Rome Academics have agreed that there were 6 and 12 days intervals in testing the evidence (that happened in the July hearings).

DNA doesn't sit on DNA testing machines for years.

Specific to the knife there were not 6 - 12 days between the analysis as Stephanoni testified herself that it was tested during the course of many items is a laboaratory that she again states never has contamination of which I know of no laboratory that would ever make such a claim

"Record of the Court of Assizes hearing on 23/05/09, pages 29-30: “Well, the knife was tested as one item in the course of 50 samples attributed to the victim, some were before the tests on the knife naturally, and others after, so of these 50…I don’t know the knife was placed, now I don’t know, at a fourth, a third of this series of tests, but in any case even if the knife was analyzed at the end of these 50, 60 samples, in any case this wouldn’t affect the validity of the results, because each sample is tested separately, it is absolutely impossible to mix one sample with another, also because the Kercher file is just one of many files we dealt with simultaneously in the laboratory, it’s not as if the Scientific Police Service stopped to deal with the Kercher file…&#8221

http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/c...ntific-police/

 

[Allusonz]

okay, i've loosely watched this case...and am trying to get caught up on the evidence, etc. What is the consenus on WS...innocent?

:welcome:

hands you a designer straight jacket for this thread

It depends on what evidence you agree with or disagree with thus it truly is a journey that an individual must determine on their own

 

[Allusonz]

It seems Comodi believes Hellman is against the prosecution, and is preparing for high court:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23984490-knox-will-be-freed-says-prosecutor.do

I think it is actually unbelievable that she said this to the press, about the Judge, while court proceedings are ongoing. Just shocking....IMO:waitasec:

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/09/07/general-eu-italy-knox_8662380.html

Just a quick thank you SMK for all the links you have been posting. Work has been so busy that I have not had the time I normally do thus it has saved me a great deal of looking

 

[sherlockh]

As per the experts report:

"- The quantification of the extracts obtained from the samples obtained from item 36 (knife) and item 165B (bra clasps), conducted via Real Time PCR, did not reveal the presence of DNA."

http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/contents/conclusions-2/

Then what is Torricelli talking about? Still the original trace? There was something left of it? Doesn't make the non-testing excuse much better.

Earlier, forensic expert Francesca Torricelli, used by the Kercher family's attorney, questioned in her testimony why the independent experts had not tested the small amount of DNA material found on another key piece of evidence -- a knife from Sollecito's home that prosecutors in 2009 said had traces of Knox's genetic material on the handle and Kercher's in a tiny groove on the blade.

Vecchiotti testified in earlier hearings that the knife tested negative for blood and the amount of DNA said to be Kercher's was so low, it could not be examined again with any conclusions.

But Torricelli said Tuesday she had witnessed the work of Vecchiotti and Conti, and that the machinery they used during their investigation could check extremely low quantities of DNA.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/09/06/italy.knox.appeal/

 

[emyr]

Thanks. From the next sentence in the same article ... "She insisted that out of 133 specimens analyzed in the house of the murder - including 89 in Kercher's room - Sollecito's genetic profile was only found in a cigarette butt in an ashtray, mixed with Knox's." I'm not particularly interested in attempting to discredit experts in order to get someone out of prison - that does seem to be such an old argument commonly used by criminals on a daily basis. I prefer to see a clean argument based on evidence. It seems to me that the only question is how Sollecito's DNA got onto the clasp. Since 89 samples were taken from the bedroom and the only good sample matching Sollecito was on the clasp, it's difficult to argue that it got there by contamination ... unless DNA flies ... which it doesn't. It's also difficult to argue that the mixed sample of Sollecito/Knox DNA on the cigarette flew into the room since it had to drop the Knox profile on the way down the hall ... also not realistic.

It's worthwhile noting that Meredith's DNA was not on her sock, which gives an indication of how DNA transfer works, or doesn't work.

What is proven regarding the case or the evidence by showing that something, like the investigator's tools, were taken into the bedroom?

Normally I would agree, but in this case the experts have done an excellent job of discrediting themselves. The video of the procurement of the bra clasp shows a cavalier attitude towards evidence handling. Stefanoni's handling of paper records shows disorganization at best. She states she did things and the video evidence shows she did otherwise. She goes into a situation where her professional reputation itself is at stake and she provides records she says that proves she did her job, and the records are the wrong records. It's comical.

To me, her statements as to how the evidence was handled holds no water. All it takes is touching Sollecito's DNA with a gloved hand and touching the clasp with a gloved hand. All it takes is touching any of the evidence that had Meredith on it and touching the blade of the knife. Intentional or unintentional, we now have numerous examples of Stefanoni behaving unprofessionally, and the evidence procurement specialists behaving unprofessionally.

I think the defense attorneys have also behaved unprofessionally, that the defendants themselves have shown poor judgement and displayed poor social skills. I think the independent experts should have re-tested the knife. I think the parade of criminals was laughable, and reeks of Sollecito's family trying to manipulate the courts.

This whole case reminds me of the old Louisiana courts, where back room deals and corrupt cops and prosecutors and defense attorneys engaged in endless sheninagins and the truth is beside the point. The whole thing is ridiculous.

In my opinion, there isn't enough evidence to prove the guilt of Amanda and Raffaelle. In my opinion, the evidence tilts towards their innocence, but it doesn't prove they are innocent either.

The whole thing is just a mess.

 

[SMK]

Just a quick thank you SMK for all the links you have been posting. Work has been so busy that I have not had the time I normally do thus it has saved me a great deal of looking

Most welcome!

 

[SMK]

the nagging question i have...why implicate the boss if innocent..more reading to do.

I think that was a reasonable question of the first trial, but this second trial is hinging largely on the DNA evidence, which I believe Judge Hellman will address and direct his jury on. Welcome to WS!

Amanda Knox's father says DNA evidence 'critical' - YouTube

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/world/2011/09/07/chance-amanda-curt-knox-case.cnn

 

[trillian]

There are persons in this case who should be locked up for a while, maybe even committed, but certainly not the ones they have behind bars now.

I have yet to hear a plausible series of events that fits with guilt. Cleaning only your own footprints without smearing cleaner or leaving traces of blood or erasing any of the real killers prints? Randomly carrying a 12in knife around just to go home while walking with your new boyfriend? Running into a guy you barely know, if you even remembered him at all, and deciding on some weird sex game with your roommate? Then you stage a break in that "just so happens" to match the exact technique of the guy whose dna is inside the victim? Seriously? This is the story we are supposed to believe?

It's all so unbelieveably preposterous that I am amazed that anyone with any amount of logic and common sense can swallow it.

MOO, of course.

If these convictions are upheld it will be such a travesty.

 

[SMK]

Knox trial: Court rejects new DNA test
Decision is blow to prosecution after independent review criticized how genetic evidence was used in her murder trial

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44422551/ns/today-today_news/t/knox-trial-court-rejects-new-dna-test-request/