Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Amanda Knox Is Innocent

Miss Caphat said:
that's not true. Also I have not posted any pictures, and hardly anyone has quoted from "the actual evidence" which IMO is a piece of crap and should be burned anyway.
fwiw, you honestly seem one of the least informed people on here about this case. not really too worried about you think tbh.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Like, the evidence should all be burned and then we can all quote from Rolling stone magazine.
 
Anudder Oik said:
That's obviously notes from a non italian who wasn't even there unless you want to argue that Stefanoni, who is italian, writes in english. Try addressing the actual reports.
Click to expand...

Where do you get this rubbish?
Click to expand...

Oh only from the Conti Vechiotti report.

Yes let's address the indepth and exhaustive report of judge appointed experts known as the Conti Vechiotti report which utterly discredited the prosecution forensic case. In which they conclude that

Taking into account that none of the recommendations of the international scientific community relative to the treatment of Low Copy Number (LCN) samples were followed, we do not accept the conclusions regarding the certain attribution of the profile found on trace B (blade of knife) to the victim Meredith Susanna Cara Kercher, since the genetic profile, as obtained, appears unreliable insofar as it is not supported by scientifically validated analysis;
4. International protocols of inspection, collection, and sampling were not followed;

It cannot be ruled out that the result obtained from sample B (blade of knife) derives from contamination in some phase of the collection and/or handling and/or analyses performed.
Click to expand...

it does not appear that inspection procedures were carried out according to international protocols in order to minimize environmental contamination;

- international protocols of collection and sampling of the itemwere not applied in order to minimize contamination from handling;

- it is not known whether rigorous decontamination procedures were applied in the laboratory to minimize laboratory contamination;

- a reliable method for quantifying the DNA from samples A-B-C was not employed, and the quantification performed with the Qubit Fluorimeter™ gave the result “too low” for samples B-C, indicating a DNA amount below the sensitivity threshold of the Fluorimeter (>200 pg/μl), and therefore indicative of a probable LCN sample;
- the electrophoretic graphs exhibited show that the sample indicated with the letter B (knife blade) should have been considered an LCN sample (peak imbalance, RFU below 50 for most of the alleles) and as an LCN sample, all the precautions indicated by the International Scientific Community should have been applied. Amongst these we recall:

a) rigorous respect for decontamination procedures for the instrumentation, the laboratory and the staff (as already mentioned, the procedures adopted to minimize contamination are not reported);

b) testing of the item in a laboratory where no items ascribable to the victim were tested, to avoid any possibility of evidence contamination with already amplified DNA. On the contrary, it was reported that the item was placed for testing into a context where a considerable number of samples belonging to the victim had already been examined (Record of the Court of Assizes hearing on 23.05.09, pages 29-30: “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…”);

c) performing 2-3 replicate amplifications with the development of a consensus profile. In the case in question, the amplification was only performed once; therefore the lack of replicate amplification with the development of a consensus profile provides unreliable results (GUP hearing on 05.10.08, pages 21-22: to the question, “…the testing of a trace of this type should be repeated several times to be considered reliable?” The TC responds: “In theory yes”. To the question: “How many times did you do it?” she responds: “In this case only once”. Q: “Only once, and therefore in theorywhy ought it be considered more reliable if one does it several times?” A: Because reproducibility of the result is, so to speak, a good standard in any scientific experiment quite apart from forensic genetics,obviously in order to be considered valid a result must be repeatable”).
d) employment of negative controls in the amplification procedure to check for the presence of contamination. In the attached eletropherograms, neither negative nor positive controls are reported.
Click to expand...

Of course. After all your whining about read the reports, read the reports, you have read it or at least its conclusions right? Because to read your posts one could be forgiven for thinking there had been an appeal at all or that the discrediting of the forensics you are citing led to the release of the couple

http://knoxdnareport.wordpress.com/contents/conclusions-2/
 
Dylans, the information you post from the Conti Vechiotti report is very interesting. They didn't actually test for the DNA themselves but went over Stefanoni's procedures step by step. As other independent investigators had done so before them. Conti Vechiotti reached the conclusions above that you post and permitted themselves to speculate( it is not known whether rigorous decontamination procedures were applied in the laboratory to minimize laboratory contamination;). Which is not scientific. It is not known but they use it as part of their criticism anyway. I have heard that Stefanoni is considering sueing them.

However, 4 other independent investigators with much higher qualifications also went over the same work before them and found it to be correct. I have listed their names in post 1137. They are the top forensic experts in Italy.

Two genetic profiles are identical and therefore belong to the same individual if a) they are in the same position, and b) they have identical shape and dimension. In this case, each peak produced in the original samples exactly corresponds to the peaks yielded by the knife sample, position, shape and dimension.

Here is a link to Stefanoni's findings that are subject to Conti and Vechiotti's report. In it you see the sample from the knife superimposed with the victim's DNA pattern.

They match. Take a look.

http://truejustice.org/ee/images/perugia/frontpage92/9203.pdf

These tests were carried out in front of defence witnesses who have to be informed so that they can attend the testing.

It doesn't look like a low 20% match or a piece of bread.

Unless the other 4 experts retract their statements then it is still 5 experts against 2 academics. It has got to go to the supreme court.
 
Sorry but I need analysis and context to accompany those graphs. Otherwise they are just pointy shapey things to a layperson like me. Have you got a link to a scientific analysis or explanation of them? Whose DNA are they meant to represent. Are they meant to indicate Meredith Kercher's DNA on the knife blade?
 
let's not forget that (and yes, this is in the court file) Knox & Sollecito were supposedly hanging out at the girls' apartment that night (based on testimony of a heroin addict who had the wrong day), not at Sollecito's place.
Why would they have walked all the way back there to get this knife to kill Meredith with? Especially if they were so stoned (according to the court file) and Rafaelle carried a knife anyway (according to the court file)?
 
Something must also be understood about Low copy Number testing. This form of DNA testing is notoriously sensitive to contamination and therefore controversial as a reliable procedure, its use was actually suspended from being used as evidence in UK courts for several years and only resumed after strict new guidelines were issued. Following the Omagh bombing in 1998, an innocent man Sean Hoey was almost falsely convicted on the basis of LCN testing. It IS notoriously prone to contamination and other errors. As such it is internationally recognised that ultra secure,extra safeguards, stringent procedures, specially equipped laboratories and specially trained technicians etc are needed above and beyond the already stringent conditions required of all forensic testing. Thus when it is said that the Italian investigators did not follow those procedures, it means that the possibility of error and contamination is extremely high. This is the reason that the CVR report conclusion is so significant

The electrophoretic profiles exhibited reveal that the sample indicated by the letter B (blade of knife) was a Low Copy Number (LCN) sample, and, as such, all of the precautions indicated by the international scientific community should have been applied.
3. Taking into account that none of the recommendations of the international scientific community relative to the treatment of Low Copy Number (LCN) samples were followed, we do not accept the conclusions regarding the certain attribution of the profile found on trace B (blade of knife) to the victim Meredith Susanna Cara Kercher, since the genetic profile, as obtained, appears unreliable insofar as it is not supported by scientifically validated analysis;
4. International protocols of inspection, collection, and sampling were not followed;

5. It cannot be ruled out that the result obtained from sample B (blade of knife) derives from contamination in some phase of the collection and/or handling and/or analyses performed.
Click to expand...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/dec/22/northernireland.northernireland
 
dylans said:
Sorry but I need analysis and context to accompany those graphs. Otherwise they are just pointy shapey things to a layperson like me. Have you got a link to a scientific analysis or explanation of them? Whose DNA are they meant to represent. Are they meant to indicate Meredith Kercher's DNA on the knife blade?
Click to expand...

The DNA represented on the graph is from the victim superimposed with the DNA from the double DNA knife.
There is this link with explanations and more graphs and it has information on the "other" experts who reviewed the same evidence.
Dr. Renato Biondo, Professor Francesca Torricelli, General Luciano Garofano, Dr. Anna Barbaro

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...why_they_probably_wont_help_defense_and_may_/
 
Anudder Oik said:
The DNA represented on the graph is from the victim superimposed with the DNA from the double DNA knife.
There is this link with explanations and more graphs and it has information on the "other" experts who reviewed the same evidence.
Dr. Renato Biondo, Professor Francesca Torricelli, General Luciano Garofano, Dr. Anna Barbaro

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...why_they_probably_wont_help_defense_and_may_/
Click to expand...
One look at that article tells me it is bollocks. It states.

Dr. Stefanoni found seven traces of human flesh (human tissue cells) on the large kitchen knife sequestered from Sollecito’s kitchen. .
Click to expand...

No they didn't. They found Knox's DNA on the handle, but this is not disputed or controversial. She used kitchen utensils in her boyfriends apartment. On the blade they found no such trace of human flesh or of blood. Absolute bollocks.
The cytomorphological tests on the items did not reveal the presence of cellular material. Some samples of item 36 (knife), in particular sample “H”, present granules with a circular/hexagonal characteristic morphology with a cental radial structure. A more detailed microscopic study, together with the consultation of data in the literature, allowed us to ascertain that the structures in question are attributable to granules of starch, thus matter of a vegetable nature.
Click to expand...

and incidentally, it seems fair to point out to you that the site you continually link to is a pro guilt site and one that is becoming increasingly hysterical. It quotes Bill O Reilly approvingly for god's sakes. I wouldn't mind but you have spent an awful lot of time on here attacking some of us for using sites that campaigned for Knox's innocence. The quote above is taken directly from the CVR report.
 
You can't deny that 4 of Italy's top forensic scientists backed up Stefanoni's findings after reviewing it for themselves. That makes 5 against 2.

The verdict last monday would not have been delivered if it weren't for the jury system.

As for that site it has more facts and analysis than any other. They don't ususally make mistakes. I agree the 4 bits of flesh is news to me. I'll check it out but the rest of the article is ok.
 
Anudder Oik said:
You can't deny that 4 of Italy's top forensic scientists backed up Stefanoni's findings after reviewing it for themselves. That makes 5 against 2.

The verdict last monday would not have been delivered if it weren't for the jury system.

As for that site it has more facts and analysis than any other. They don't ususally make mistakes. I agree the 4 bits of flesh is news to me. I'll check it out but the rest of the article is ok.
Click to expand...
Well thank god for the Jury system.
The forensic's in the Birmingham 6 case was supported by the top forensic scientists of the day. Frank Skuse the leading investigator stood in the witness box and swore that he was 99% certain that the 6 were guilty. You have far too much faith in the legal establishment my friend.

(anyway this has been flogged enough. so I am retiring from this thread) ........

(Rudy Guede did it. alone)
 
The only certainty I can gain from the media coverage of this case is that copious amounts of stereotypes regarding sex, national origin, race, and social class have been thrown around. It seems that all sides are taking their preconceived notions and flinging them around like "facts." I have no idea who murdered Meredith Kurcher and wouldn't venture a guess from any of the media coverage I've seen so far.
 
It's not a retrial but a reappeal. The last one which freed the accused being flawed and to some extent even illegal so it has to be done again.

For example; the defence were incredibly allowed to reduce the scene of the crime to one room in isolation from the rest of the flat, which logically is part of the crime scene as well. This allowed the defence to cherry pick evidence (DNA)* that they then attacked. It was also illegal for the judge not to allow the DNA testing again and it was pointed out that the appeal judges use of vocabulary pointed to a not guilty premise, like he had decided beforehand that they were innocent. That is malpractice.

Anyone interested in the case should read this thread from the beginning or consult this web, which has translations of the legal documents, reports, powerpoints and roundups of all the evidence that put everything into perspective:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

As for posts about witches and stuff, that is just typical of defenders of the Knox camp, as they persistently choose to focus on the gossipy stuff, as though it were a defence, and avoid talking about the hard facts, such as evidence, etc...

* From the above website:
two consultants, illegally appointed and ill qualified, tried to make out there was possible contamination. They proved nothing. They ADMITTED Meredith’s DNA was on the big knife and that Sollecito’s DNA was on the bra clasp. There was lots of other incriminating DNA evidence outside Meredith’s door.
 
Anudder Oik said:
As for posts about witches and stuff, that is just typical of defenders of the Knox camp, as they persistently choose to focus on the gossipy stuff, as though it were a defence, and avoid talking about the hard facts, such as evidence, etc...
Click to expand...

Nope. Pretty much everyone is guilty of it. Some of the anti-Knox stuff I've heard is incredibly mysogenistic.
 
Yuwipi Woman said:
Nope. Pretty much everyone is guilty of it. Some of the anti-Knox stuff I've heard is incredibly mysogenistic.
Click to expand...

A lot of that weird stuff found itself into the courtroom too. Doing cartwheels while under interrogation etc.... the entire prosecution was wacky...
 
Anudder Oik said:
As for posts about witches and stuff, that is just typical of defenders of the Knox camp, as they persistently choose to focus on the gossipy stuff, as though it were a defence, and avoid talking about the hard facts, such as evidence, etc...
Click to expand...

Did the chief Prosecutor of this case believe Amanda Knox was a witch?

Yes, evidently he did.

You know what that makes her trial right?
 
Anudder Oik said:
It's not a retrial but a reappeal. The last one which freed the accused being flawed and to some extent even illegal so it has to be done again.

For example; the defence were incredibly allowed to reduce the scene of the crime to one room in isolation from the rest of the flat, which logically is part of the crime scene as well. This allowed the defence to cherry pick evidence (DNA)* that they then attacked. It was also illegal for the judge not to allow the DNA testing again and it was pointed out that the appeal judges use of vocabulary pointed to a not guilty premise, like he had decided beforehand that they were innocent. That is malpractice.

Anyone interested in the case should read this thread from the beginning or consult this web, which has translations of the legal documents, reports, powerpoints and roundups of all the evidence that put everything into perspective:

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php

As for posts about witches and stuff, that is just typical of defenders of the Knox camp, as they persistently choose to focus on the gossipy stuff, as though it were a defence, and avoid talking about the hard facts, such as evidence, etc...

* From the above website:
two consultants, illegally appointed and ill qualified, tried to make out there was possible contamination. They proved nothing. They ADMITTED Meredith’s DNA was on the big knife and that Sollecito’s DNA was on the bra clasp. There was lots of other incriminating DNA evidence outside Meredith’s door.
Click to expand...
That site is useful but nowhere near impartial, and much of the documentation is translated so you are reliant on the translator being neutral, which is questionable. You need to triangulate it with the pro-Knox sites and as many media sources as you can find.

There's a lot of nonsense as well as truth on all of them, and a lot of weird details that have explanations but which you won't find on the anti-Knox sites.
 
phildwyer said:
A lot of that weird stuff found itself into the courtroom too. Doing cartwheels while under interrogation etc.... the entire prosecution was wacky...
Click to expand...

Was "wierd stuff" used as evidence? I don't think so. The cartwheels were widely reported, are you denying them? Was "witchcraft used as evidence? No, so it is irrelevent.

Also, why the focus on the gossip stories and the wild projections? It seems like a smoke screen to help avoid talking seriously about the real case.

It's far more constructive to talk about the evidence, the timing, the changing alibi's, the fake robbery, the framing of the bar owner, the phone call at 3 in the morning to Knox's mother, Solecitos claim that the victim's blood got onto the knife when she visited his house (she never did), the cleaned floors and why knox removed the mop from the house the next morning...just to name a few aspects that need to be cleared up.

what is more, there are claims that the DNA conclusion at the appeal that released Knox and Solecito were not all that honest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ymu
ymu said:
That site is useful but nowhere near impartial, and much of the documentation is translated so you are reliant on the translator being neutral, which is questionable. You need to triangulate it with the pro-Knox sites and as many media sources as you can find.

There's a lot of nonsense as well as truth on all of them, and a lot of weird details that have explanations but which you won't find on the anti-Knox sites.
Click to expand...

Can you give one example where triangulation with pro Knox sites could be useful?

I ask because I get the impression the pro Knox sites avoid the evidence as much as possible and concentrate on sentiment, nationalistic emotions or her looks. They are quite dumbed down when compared to the justice web.

The whole defence at the appeal, that resulted in aquittal, was centred around totally "ignoring" the mass of evidence, rendering everything outside the murder room as irrelevent. They were allowed to move the "legal" goal posts in an exceptional violation of law. That has now been remedied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

krtek a houby
JD Vance's time is up
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
166
Views
8K
two sheds
two sheds
Sweet FA
Hopefully Sean 'Diddy' Combs' time is up
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
ID47
I
Pickman's model
George v's time is up
Replies
3
Views
657
tim
tim
N
Is Trump's personality a result of self-loathing?
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
4K
two sheds
two sheds
tim
Lula's time is up.
Replies
3
Views
988
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
Back
Top Bottom