tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post1118706742680415202..comments2024-01-31T03:00:37.150-05:00Comments on View-from-Wilmington: The utility of electronic data files in DNA forensics casesChris Halkideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comBlogger143125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-90105475278769504302010-04-23T13:49:43.238-04:002010-04-23T13:49:43.238-04:00Joe,
I agree that there was shaping going on and i...Joe,<br />I agree that there was shaping going on and it this instance they were not to clever about it. And in other areas of Filomena testimony (the she said she said parts) perhaps there was also some shaping.<br />TMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-21629193656152472652010-04-22T22:15:04.447-04:002010-04-22T22:15:04.447-04:00Joe,
Thanks for replying. What does filomena's...Joe,<br />Thanks for replying. What does filomena's statement about the thief being stupid beacause he left glass on top of things mean to you?<br />Now a stager could be stupid for leaving glass. And a thief can be stupid for not taking things. Are we to surmise that filomena suspected a staging from the beginning?<br />There are a lot of strange things in this case,<br />but I find this statement(which the judge thought was so impotant to cite) to be one of the stangest.TM<br /><br />April 22, 2010 9:21 PM<br /><br />-------------<br /><br />TM,<br /><br />I don't know what to make of that statement. <br /><br />So much weight has been placed on Filomena's testimony that glass was on top of the clothes.<br /><br />At first glance, when looking at the photo of the whole room, with the doors of the armoire open, it does appear that the room had been trashed and that clothes were pulled out of the armoire and onto the floor. But when I look at the photo that shows the armoire nearly full of clothes and those clothes stacked neatly inside, I wonder if those were simply dirty clothes left on the floor before the window was broken.<br /><br />As mentioned in the post above, the motivations does make reference to Filomena being "usually tidy." What Filomena didn't explicitly state was that she didn't leave the clothes on the floor and that the room wasn't cluttered before she left the flat prior to the murder.<br /><br />I also have other questions put forth in some of my other comments on this post. Too many questions remain to say unequivocally that the B&E was staged.<br /><br />I'm not accusing Filomena of lying at all, but I am wondering if her testimony was shaped to fit the prosecution's theory.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14976348113180173146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-17338135373222172312010-04-22T21:21:17.440-04:002010-04-22T21:21:17.440-04:00Joe,
Thanks for replying. What does filomena's...Joe,<br />Thanks for replying. What does filomena's statement about the thief being stupid beacause he left glass on top of things mean to you?<br /> Now a stager could be stupid for leaving glass. And a thief can be stupid for not taking things. Are we to surmise that filomena suspected a staging from the beginning?<br />There are a lot of strange things in this case,<br /> but I find this statement(which the judge thought was so impotant to cite) to be one of the stangest.TMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-32469636358259095002010-04-22T20:58:49.111-04:002010-04-22T20:58:49.111-04:00TM,
It being your car I would trust you to remembe...TM,<br />It being your car I would trust you to remember the state you left your glove compartment and seat of the car in. I don't believe you have any reason to lie about it. I don't see that Filomena has any reason to lie in her testimony either.<br /><br />April 22, 2010 8:40 PM<br /><br />--------------<br /><br />The motivations stated that Filomena was "usually tidy" and that when she entered the room her clothes were on the floor. This may be splitting hairs, but she never stated that her clothes were not on the floor when she left her room. I never accused Filomena of lying. She simply stated that when she returned her clothes were on the floor and she saw glass on them.<br /><br />The question still remains. Did the window breaker selectively and neatly pull clothes out of the armoire (which was nearly full of clothes in the photo) to "trash" the room?Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14976348113180173146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-74738794867637930602010-04-22T20:45:12.501-04:002010-04-22T20:45:12.501-04:00Correction, post should be addressed to Joe. My b...Correction, post should be addressed to Joe. My bad.Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-23953704542329403312010-04-22T20:40:49.433-04:002010-04-22T20:40:49.433-04:00TM,
It being your car I would trust you to remembe...TM,<br />It being your car I would trust you to remember the state you left your glove compartment and seat of the car in. I don't believe you have any reason to lie about it. I don't see that Filomena has any reason to lie in her testimony either.Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-67575573200011255922010-04-22T20:30:32.628-04:002010-04-22T20:30:32.628-04:00Taking your car example further, the thief is real...Taking your car example further, the thief is really one of your kids who uses your keys to unlock your car door and take something out of the glove compartment. In the process he dumps everything else in your glove compartment onto the seat of the car. Now to make it look like a robbery he smashes the window on that side dumping glass all over the glove compartment stuff.<br /><br />April 22, 2010 8:21 PM<br /><br />------------<br /><br />But what happens when you look at a photo of the glove compartment and see that it is nearly full?<br /><br />Do you wonder where all that stuff on the seat came from or whether it was there to begin with?Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14976348113180173146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-11932772102693974262010-04-22T20:21:08.082-04:002010-04-22T20:21:08.082-04:00Taking your car example further, the thief is real...Taking your car example further, the thief is really one of your kids who uses your keys to unlock your car door and take something out of the glove compartment. In the process he dumps everything else in your glove compartment onto the seat of the car. Now to make it look like a robbery he smashes the window on that side dumping glass all over the glove compartment stuff.Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-34321718559117003692010-04-22T18:59:44.362-04:002010-04-22T18:59:44.362-04:00She admitted that the exterior shutters would not ...She admitted that the exterior shutters would not close all the way. The window and interior shutters were locked.Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-81198648920066544922010-04-22T17:48:53.690-04:002010-04-22T17:48:53.690-04:00Did Filomena leave the window open.
TMDid Filomena leave the window open.<br />TMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-80835355847080078092010-04-22T16:06:32.159-04:002010-04-22T16:06:32.159-04:00TM said: To Rose and Debrah
Do you say when you ca...TM said: <i>To Rose and Debrah<br />Do you say when you car is broken into "What a stupid thief he left glass on the seat?<br />TM</i><br /><br />Only if I left the car unlocked.Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-69641520862794514622010-04-21T15:35:16.666-04:002010-04-21T15:35:16.666-04:00Debrah,
To me the statement of Filomena is illogic...Debrah,<br />To me the statement of Filomena is illogical or contrived and then perhaps sinister. The judge makes a big deal about this statement in his arguement of a staged break- in but I see a coached testimony with a slip-up.<br />TMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-48552198108338883692010-04-21T12:41:55.184-04:002010-04-21T12:41:55.184-04:00TM--
I don't know what I'd say if someone...TM--<br /><br />I don't know what I'd say if someone broke into my car.<br /><br />Probably "OMG!!!".<br /><br />However, if the thief broke a window instead of doing a <i>clean</i> break-in through the door lock, the pattern of the resulting shattered glass inside the car would reveal a bit about the thief's MO.Debrahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04567454727276881424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-84889382692660442602010-04-19T15:26:57.613-04:002010-04-19T15:26:57.613-04:00To Rose and Debrah
Do you say when you car is brok...To Rose and Debrah<br />Do you say when you car is broken into "What a stupid thief he left glass on the seat?<br />TMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-3988720017908097672010-04-19T09:28:25.827-04:002010-04-19T09:28:25.827-04:00Ann Wise
of ABC news
has two stories from Septembe...<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/defense-expert-disputes-dna-evidence-amanda-knox-trial/story?id=8680234" rel="nofollow">Ann Wise</a><br />of <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/US/amanda-knox-trial-resumes-dna-fight/story?id=8566292" rel="nofollow">ABC news</a><br />has two stories from September on the DNA evidence. In the first one Wise wrote, “The trial reopened with an attempt to have the case thrown out, but it was rejected after the judge and the jurors deliberated for 90 minutes. Lawyers for Knox and Sollecito became animated in their assertion that evidence had been withheld from them. Sollecito's lawyer, Giulia Bongiorno, addressed the court for 20 minutes arguing that the defense was not provided with crucial details of Sollecito's DNA allegedly found on Kercher's bra hook until July 30. The rights of the defense were damaged, she said, when ‘documents regarding the quantity of biological material on the bra hook and documents regarding the procedure used to attain DNA results were not made available to the defense.’” <br /><br />There is also a quote in the first of the two stories that has echoes of the DL case. “’She used to have utter faith in everybody and I can tell you know that she has lost faith in people of responsibility. She was attempting to help the police and it was literally turned on her,’ Curt Knox said. He later added, ‘She'll never be the way she really was. But I also think she'll live a really hearty life.’”Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-5476366202967599812010-04-19T08:07:36.273-04:002010-04-19T08:07:36.273-04:00That is a terrific find Randy. Thank you. It appe...That is a terrific find Randy. Thank you. It appears to support the claim that the defense did not get all the data they wanted.Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-40950024045727118742010-04-19T01:50:25.584-04:002010-04-19T01:50:25.584-04:00"halides1 said...
Bob Graham has a brief..."halides1 said...<br /><br /> Bob Graham has a brief second article, which is on some of Rudy Guede’s other crimes.<br />April 18, 2010 9:25 PM"<br /><br />what are the odds if Guede was in jail for 1 of the the crimes, this whole nightmare would never have taken place? <br /><br /><br /><br />from the Sept. 14, 2009 "too low" write up at perguia shock...<br /><br />"And yes, both defenses tried to do something, they explained that without raw data, without knowing the setting of the machine we still don't know how we got to that result. And they filed a claim to the judge. A little claim, simply the annulment of Micheli's decree of trial. Which means to cancel the whole process and send everyone home, free. As a sub-claim they asked to invalidate the sole DNA results.<br /><br />So, following the request the judges went to deliberate.<br />It was a particular feeling pretending to believe that everything could just finish today, and in one hour or so we could all go toasting at the bar with tarallucci & vino, together with Amanda and Raffaele.<br /><br />One thing is dreams, another the reality. It was already amazing that, at the last hearing, Massei had allowed the suspension of the trial and the production of additional data. Maybe the coincidence with the summer break helped in that occasion. The defenses, following that successful move, were confident in another favorable decision for today.<br /><br />But the time for vacations is over and Massei doesn't make gifts anymore, he doesn't feel like hearing subtleties. And came back with his ruthless verdict: the trial continues, the DNA results are fine like this. Whether we like it or not we have to trust Stefanoni. And that's it. This was, after all, his original position, which he suspended (or pretended to suspend) only for vacations...<br /><br />Stop kidding, back to work, the trial resumes from the point at which it was stopped: Adriano Tagliabracci and his analysis of the DNA tests. At least, though, he is now able to use the new data."<br /><br />http://perugia-shock.blogspot.com/2009/09/too-low.html<br /><br />what is he talking about- new data? most of the writing seemed to imply that the defense was still missing some data. Is the "new data"- data that was given to the defenese during that Summer break? Reading the blog, led me to believe that the defense still didn't have all the raw data and wanted to at a minimum get rid of the DNA results or their main goal of ending the trial right then and there.Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06793623287762008054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-53023874678142607482010-04-18T23:42:15.577-04:002010-04-18T23:42:15.577-04:00I wonder if Mignini will appeal the extenuating ci...I wonder if Mignini will appeal the extenuating circumstances granted to Rudy in his first appeal trial? <br /><br />Maybe not because of that apology?Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14976348113180173146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-44999543930712676262010-04-18T23:32:17.677-04:002010-04-18T23:32:17.677-04:00"The claim that Bruce made that the police ju..."The claim that Bruce made that the police just did a cursory investigation of this room is far from the truth of the matter, in my opinion."<br /><br />April 18, 2010 8:20 AM<br /><br />------------------<br /><br />Rose,<br /><br />So, they thoroughly investigated this room?<br /><br />Just like they thoroughly investigated whose shoes the shoe prints belonged to?<br />They did check Sollecito's shoes, but no match was made. Then, they just attributed them to Sollecito. Sollecito's uncle discovered the type of shoe by matching up the tread pattern, from the photos, with shoes in shoe stores.<br /><br />Just like they checked the local hospitals and clinics after the murder to see if anybody had received treatment for knife wounds? No, they didn't do this. How do we know this? Local reporter Francesca Bene discovered this when interviewing hospital personnel for an unrelated matter. Even the Keystone Cops would probably check the local hospitals or clinics after a knifing.<br /><br />Just like Dr. Stefanoni didn't test the luminol-positive stains for blood?<br />From the following article: http://www.chem.lsu.edu/htdocs/people/rlmccarley/mccarley/Chemistry%202001/Articles_SP2008/Barni_Talanta_Luminol_Forensics.pdf “The most problematic chemicals for a correct interpretation of luminol test results are those which provoke intensification of a generation of a chemiluminescence emission even if blood is not present, leading to false-positive results. Due to the possible presence of these substances at the crime scene, the luminol test must not be considered sufficiently specific to permit an unequivocal identification of blood.”<br />This was a murder investigation and trial. Doesn't justice demand a thorough investigation - to be more definitive than just stating "presumably in blood" at the trial? Now this would be less of an issue if there was evidence that these footprints originated from Meredith's room, such as visible or luminol-positive footprints in her room or leading out of the room.<br /><br />Just like they didn't ask for DNA samples from the other two flatmates to compare with crime scene samples? There may be some constitutionality issues with this, but Filomena and Laura supposedly had rock solid alibis. So this shouldn't have been a problem, if they really wanted to help. This is important because of the mixed luminol-positive stain in Filomena's room. <br />According to Frank in a quote from a conversation with Professor Giuseppe Novelli, considered a prominent DNA expert in Italy, “The DNA is a perfect test. The only possibility it may be wrong are when there is amplification and when there’s a mixture of profiles.” It gets subjective when the DNA is mixed. Dr. Stefanoni said this stain showed DNA profiles compatible with Meredith and Amanda and it was made "presumably in blood." (There's that pesky "presumably in blood" again.) How do we know this stain didn't contain the DNA of Meredith and Filomena, or Filomena and Laura?<br /><br />Just like they left the bra clasp?<br /><br />Just like they didn't get elimination footprints from Filomena and Laura?<br /><br />Maybe the investigators were too busy frying computer hard drives to do all those things.<br /><br />I believe it is a considerable stretch to say the investigation was thorough. That's just my opinion.<br /><br />I have serious issues with the subjective nature of shaping evidence and testimony to support a theory.<br /><br />Show me hard, "unassailable" evidence and I'll support a guilty conviction. I haven't seen it yet.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14976348113180173146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-30761427857051535982010-04-18T22:34:41.522-04:002010-04-18T22:34:41.522-04:00Rose,
You are so convinced from the motivations a...Rose,<br /><br />You are so convinced from the motivations and from Filomena's testimony that the B&E was staged. Could you answer the following questions with confidence?<br /><br />Where is the damage to the inside of the exterior shutters if the rock was thrown as described in the motivations?<br /><br />Did the window breaker selectively and neatly pull clothes out of the armoire (which was nearly full of clothes in the photo) to "trash" the room?<br /><br />Is it possible that Filomena could have left her computer lying down, not standing up, instead of "standing up, not lying down?"<br /><br />Does rain one day guarantee the ground will be muddy the next day?<br /><br />I won't ask about the white substance again. Maybe you could let us know after you conduct your experiment.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14976348113180173146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-83860249528088875462010-04-18T21:25:39.448-04:002010-04-18T21:25:39.448-04:00Bob Graham has a brief second article, which is on...Bob Graham has a brief second <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/170053/Killer-of-Meredith-Kercher-s-crimes-were-ignored" rel="nofollow">article</a>, which is on some of Rudy Guede’s other crimes.Chris Halkideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933976220776524122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-50295705551819221272010-04-18T20:57:03.797-04:002010-04-18T20:57:03.797-04:00"The glass being on top of the clothes and th...<i>"The glass being on top of the clothes and the computer simply means the room was trashed before the glass was broken (the break-in was staged)."</i><br />*******************************<br /><br />Precisely.Debrahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04567454727276881424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-47007559822892918832010-04-18T19:52:14.034-04:002010-04-18T19:52:14.034-04:00TM,
The glass being on top of the clothes and the ...TM,<br />The glass being on top of the clothes and the computer simply means the room was trashed before the glass was broken (the break-in was staged). <br><br />I couldn't hear that next comment for some reason.Rosenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-79517666911822969682010-04-18T19:15:18.347-04:002010-04-18T19:15:18.347-04:00Here is another thought about the glass. We are su...Here is another thought about the glass. We are suppose to believe glass was moved later and that is why none is in the pictures. So every one of those pieces were moved. EVERY ONE OF THOSE PIECES.<br />EVERY ONE OF THOSE PIECES WERE MOVED BY FILOMENA! SO NOW THE PHOTOS SHOW NONE!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8731849270338485723.post-28370532241778823172010-04-18T18:59:48.931-04:002010-04-18T18:59:48.931-04:00From the link to the motivations.
I'm very per...From the link to the motivations.<br />I'm very perplexed about this statement. The judge quotes Filomena. "It was a really stupid thief; not only did he not take anything, the broken glass was actually on top of the things."<br /> This must be a mistranslation.<br /> TMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com