Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #18

[Fulcanelli]

Why are you asking if the prosecution has to disprove something when it's the function of the prosecution to prove things, such as guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

Sorry, I don't know I've ever heard of a prosecution ever being asking to disprove something. For example, I don't think I've ever heard if the prosecution is supposed to disprove innonence. We would ask if they were supposed to prove guilt.

Before answering this question, I'd have to rephrase it so that it would logically follow the prosecution's function. So I'd ask, "is it the prosecution's job to prove big foot exists?"

In this context, the answer is yes, the prosection is supposed to prove that big foot does exist.

Because the general line here seems to be, that the prosecution have to disprove every argument the defence presents, including even if it's impossible to prove and no matter how improbable that defence argument is. And that isn't how courts work.

 

[RoseMontague]

They wouldn't have been meaningless at all! They had kits and machines capable of extracting a profile from that amount and that would have constituted the 're-test' that the defence and C & V argued should have been done. It's scandalous that they found DNA and didn't test it, doing so was the primary task set to them by judge Hellman. By small amounts. you mean 'LCN' (Low Copy Number). The use of LCN DNA in European trials is standard practice and has been for years. That is no excuse to not to test the DNA.

Welcome Fulcanelli.

Quoting from the C&V report (bolding mine):

- 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.

Too funny. Now they want a redo.

 

[SkewedView]

The prosecutors are on a fixed salary, not a commission for every person they lock up.

Indeed, and I'm not sure what the prosecutor's pay would have to do with experts being compensated for their testimony anyway.

 

[SkewedView]

They wouldn't have been meaningless at all! They had kits and machines capable of extracting a profile from that amount and that would have constituted the 're-test' that the defence and C & V argued should have been done. It's scandalous that they found DNA and didn't test it, doing so was the primary task set to them by judge Hellman. By small amounts. you mean 'LCN' (Low Copy Number). The use of LCN DNA in European trials is standard practice and has been for years. That is no excuse to not to test the DNA.

Ignoring for the moment that there is growing, alarming evidence that LCN testing was introduced into the global court systems very prematurely (the science of interpretation in these tests is in its infancy - that's why PS is correct in stating that there are no true international standards for this field, as disturbing as that is).

There is 'Low Count', and then there is 'extremely low count', which means samples where the non-amplified amount of genetic material is so low that it is indistinguishable from contamination and nearly impossible to ethically interpret the typing from.

The sample from the blade falls in this category, and as has been pointed out, PS and the other representatives from the state that where observing the Independent Experts' procedures were in agreement with their decision...until the experts gave an opinion they didn't like, that is. Funny how the State is now calling foul on something that they themselves endorsed up until this point - guess they assume that the Court has a short memory or something.

 

[RoseMontague]

"Tracking material around the flat". Amazing material. Material that has never been identified, that does not display a path into the flat (which it would, were it 'tracked into it'...where are the tracks?) and just happens to make weird shapes on the floor that matches those of Amanda's and Raffaele's feet. Are you really selling that? I think I liked it better when you were arguing it was fruit juice.

Here is a picture of the Luminol print that also shows a Luminol reaction on on of the techs boots. Guess they spilled some turnip juice on their shoes?

http://www.friendsofamanda.org/miscellaneous/luminol/146.jpg

 

[RoseMontague]

Hey SkewedView. I posted a few screenshots from Stefanoni's powerpoint in court. She also used some English/American sources. Can you tell me if she selected some good ones that support her testing?

 

[Allusonz]

You cannot answer the question with a definitive number because each crime scene is different. They are not cookie cutter receipes that you can always send just 3 people to each and everyone. For example, when kids shoot up a school campus, the LE would have to send more people to cover more ground than that little cottage required.

But, we know that the amount of people is exhorbitant in Mk's case because the independent experts have reviewed the footage of the evidence collection, and they have deemed it so. Since we are respecting these experts' opinion, we have trust that in MK's case, more than their min. entered the house. If another expert IN THIS CASE gave testimony to the contrary, let's hear that. Otherwise, we just go with what these experts said.

If anyone else wants to have a different opinion, that's fine for them, because everyone can have their own opinions here.

I believe there is a grave misconception as to the actual number of people that are suppose to be involved with the actual collection of forensics at a crime scene.

 

[Allusonz]

This is the difference in their system They are judges and judges are dynamic, they are investigators. If they don't understand anything, they are able to question the experts, call in more experts, request documentation. They are also guided by the two professional judges who explain the material at hand and all the judges discuss it together.

With an amateur jury the danger of being dazzled or confused with science or law is far greater. And, you'll never know if they've come to wrong decision through misunderstanding since they don't have to write a report to explain their reasoning, in fact they don't have to explain it in any way. Moreover, there's no minimum level of education for an amateur jury.

It still does not help if the judge guiding them does not have the knowledge required or chooses to come up with a different reasoning than is even presented in court by either the prosecution or defense.

 

[Allusonz]

No, the defence haver 'argued' there was a cartoon. 'Arguing' us not the same thing as 'was'. There was no cartoon, as was found by the trial and the appeal is not even discussing that aspect so that one's a no go.

Actually, it is in RS's appeal

 

[Allusonz]

There lab was fully equipped to handle and process LCN DNA. She raised the sensitivity of the machine. I don't care if that has not been done before, it doesn't manufacture DNA that isn't there. The DNA is either there or it isn't. It was there.

LCN DNA is still controversial. That does not mean that there are not some protocols in place such as entry requirements, UV light, air ventalation requirements etc. These were not protocols used in the lab of Stephanoni thus items of that low of level should never of been tested there

 

[Allusonz]

I don't need a cite. The fact is, as it says in the cite I provided earlier and in all the other literature, is that stomach content should only be used to form a rough guide to TOD in collaboration with other evidence, never to form an actual TOD.

And in fact, had in this case the prosecution used stomach content to determine TOD and that conformed to their current TOD, you'd be telling me know how unreliable stomach contents are for establishing TOD and it should be rejected.

I gather then that the experts testimony that slippage between 2-3 hours and by 4 hours should stand then?

 

[Allusonz]

The prosecutors are on a fixed salary, not a commission for every person they lock up.

Strange. I could of sworn the one expert called was Stephanoni's boss yet what was stated is that prosecution experts do not get paid but the defense experts do.

 

[Allusonz]

No, he was very clear about the night and so was the kiosk owner. It was the night of the murder.

Yes he was there were the disco busses and everyone were in costumes and masks. That would then make it the 31st

 

[Allusonz]

There is no such thing as 'LCN certification'.

They didn't test the DNA because they chose not to, despite it being their task. It has long been established, since the pre-trial, that the material levels on the blade of the knife was LCN. Do you think Judge Hellman is going to appoint independent experts to examine LCN DNA that don't have the machinery or capability to examine LCN DNA?

But I'll answer question anyway, yes they had the machinery and the equipment to extract LCN profiles, as was heard in court this week and they did not do it. This was the primary complaint of the prosecution.

Except the experts and the appropriate representatives determined NOT to test it.

 

[Allusonz]

What you wrote doesn't make sense.

If you go back a few pages in this thread an article was posted stating that luminol grows the brightest at 6 weeks

ETA I was simply stating I don't believe that forensics should wait 6 weeks to be collected and allow the bad guys to stay on the streets simply for the argument that luminol glows the best at 6 weeks.

 

[Allusonz]

Indeed, and I'm not sure what the prosecutor's pay would have to do with experts being compensated for their testimony anyway.

I disagree. There is no way anyone is going to make me believe that prosecution experts do not receive payment for testifying

 

[Allusonz]

There is no such thing as 'LCN certification'.

They didn't test the DNA because they chose not to, despite it being their task. It has long been established, since the pre-trial, that the material levels on the blade of the knife was LCN. Do you think Judge Hellman is going to appoint independent experts to examine LCN DNA that don't have the machinery or capability to examine LCN DNA?

But I'll answer question anyway, yes they had the machinery and the equipment to extract LCN profiles, as was heard in court this week and they did not do it. This was the primary complaint of the prosecution.

Actually this is wrong. There are a couple of labs which are certified to do LCN DNA testing. I will state though again that this is still an area of controversy

 

[Allusonz]

I'm not sure why this is being mentioned. Are you saying the 9 to 10pm TOD is acceptable because Curatolo says he saw the pair near the house at 930pm? If so, that still brings into question Nara, the ear-witness, who claimed to hear a scream somewhere around 1130pm.

If Nara and Curatolo are to both be believed, doesn't this take the TOD outside the timeframe? What is the theory of what AK and RS were doing outside the cottage for two hours, because before Curatolo was pinned down on a time frame, he said he saw them out there on and off between that timeframe. Not being sarcastic, but I'm truly asking, where they taking a killing break? Is that the theory? Which of Curatolo's testimonies are to be believed?

I ask because some have claimed that AK and RS can't be believed because of changing stories. Curatolo changed his story to a more percise time and he also switched nights, as did Nara. Why are they anymore reliable than AK, RS, or even RG, who puts the TOD at 930pm, for that matter? Some say RG put the time at 1030pm. I never, ever read that anywhere, but it still begs the question of doesn't he know better than Nara's ears?

That or she was killed after her cell phones were discarded in the garden at 10:13 as supported by this

22:13:19 10:13 PM MK, UK phone, Nov 1 < GPRS, TEXT MESSAGE 9 G 30064 Strada Vicinale Ponte Rio Monte la Guardia
Park S. Angelo near garden

What does not support her being murdered in the garden is the volume of blood found in the cottage amoung other things

 

[Allusonz]

Indeed, and I'm not sure what the prosecutor's pay would have to do with experts being compensated for their testimony anyway.

Everything when it is suggested that prosecution experts do not receive compensation only defense experts

 

[Allusonz]

Pooosssttsssss iiinnnn spacceeee.....(que cheesy spaceship model and corny robot)


But to keep this post on topic, I should add that while I find PS's demonstrated poor adherance to scientific ethics deplorable, she has nothing but sympathy from me for the unusually massive, intense pressure that this case has put her under from day one. They had to have known pretty early on that forensics was going to be the make or break part of the case, and since all of the key non-medical forensic procedures were put in her lap...man, I wouldn't want to have been in her shoes for all the tea in China...(and I really, really like tea)

Sorry I don't have alot of sympathy for someone that tries to cover their butt by trying to introduce false evidence, lying under oath, etc. on more than one occasion