View Single Post
Old 18th June 2019, 12:52 PM   #215
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 6,313
Originally Posted by TruthCalls View Post
I'm not one for conspiracy theories so I don't believe the results were rigged. But I do believe Stefanoni was essentially told to keep testing until they came up with something. I'm all but certain the egram for 36B is nothing more than lab contamination, and I suspect the suppressed results would have proven this. This also would confirm this was a deliberate effort to implicate Amanda and Raffaele.

I have no doubt that had the knife been tested by a neutral lab the results would have indicated a typical kitchen knife, used by Amanda to prepare food. It would not have been linked to the crime.

The prosecution was desperate to link Amanda to the crime and you can see that in the evidence they presented; the knife, Amanda's DNA in her own bathroom, Luminol positive prints proven not to be made with Meredith's blood, her infamous kiss and the 'tada', eating pizza. Everything is a massive stretch, that can only appear to be connected to the crime if you start out believing as much and go from there.
Of course, we should distinguish a "conspiracy theory" from an actual "conspiracy" which may be viewed by the participants as everyday professional "teamwork". For example, during Amanda's interrogation, did the "interpreter" Donnino need to be told that she should discuss her own temporary amnesia, and suggest that maybe Amanda was suffering from that, or did she offer this suggestion as a member in good standing of the police? Also, Donnino admitted in her testimony before the Boninsegna court that she realized during the interrogation that Amanda's phone message could be merely an English-speaker's attempt to write "see you later, good evening" as a good-bye greeting in Italian, but she did not offer that information to the other police during the interrogation.

So, no conspiracy, for those fearing they may be adopting a conspiracy theory, it's only excellent teamwork by the police and prosecutor.

Isn't rerunning a test in order apparently to get a result with contamination which may be considered incriminating, when the first test is exculpatory or inconclusive, and neither the first test nor the contamination are disclosed to the defense, "rigging" a test?

Last edited by Numbers; 18th June 2019 at 01:01 PM.
Numbers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top