ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Amanda Knox , Italy cases , Meredith Kercher , murder cases , Raffaele Sollecito

Reply
Old 10th November 2019, 11:57 AM   #201
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
>snip>

Vixen, will you admit that

1. you have no evidence that Wikileaks found an email from Clinton saying she would look into the case?

2. that Vinci said there was some
a)compatible* DNA of Knox on the bra,
b) he did not say Knox's DNA was on the bra, and
c) he concluded that the DNA could not be used to identify the donor?


3.Will you admit the David Balding's own computer program ruled out Knox's DNA was on the bra?

*Remember that compatibility is not the same thing as matching.
[quote=Vixen;12885148]Instead of you asking me incessant questions, what about if you attempt to answer some of mine?

I've answered your questions. Now, will you answer mine above? They're simple 'yes' or 'no' questions. Or, will you ignore them like you have done so far?
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 11:57 AM   #202
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
As I said, if Sollecito were trying to hide from the police, he would not have checked into a hotel under his own name. He'd have had his girlfriend check in for them.
Guilter-nutters lied about Sollecito on the day of the Nencini provisional-reconviction in 2014.

The fact remains - he and his girlfriend had been across the border into Austria when he got the news of the verdict.

He and she then **returned** to Italy and checked into that lodging, where eventually the Carabinieri served notice on the conditions mandated by the court.

Of everything that had gone on over the years, this was the blandest, most straightforward of them all. Guilter-nutters, on the other hand and typically, made it out like The Great Escape, with Sollecito as Steve McQueen going overland by motorcycle to the frontier.

If nothing else, it showed the guilter-nutters being unwilling to be led by evidence, while they invented guilt-sounding scenarios out of whole cloth.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 10th November 2019 at 11:59 AM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 12:16 PM   #203
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Er, did you miss the bit that said, 'snow storm'?
I was curious about this 'snowstorm' that no other report mentioned which I found odd. I looked up the weather history for Udine on Jan.30, 2014, the day Sollecito was "caught" at the border.

Odd....no snowstorm was recorded. The weather that day stayed above freezing in the 40's F and was mostly cloudy with some "light rain".

https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/...th=1&year=2014

I suspect Hillary Clinton managed to force the weather history website to post a fake weather report.

ETA: There's probably an email from her somewhere directing them to do so.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 10th November 2019 at 12:25 PM.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 12:24 PM   #204
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Guilter-nutters lied about Sollecito on the day of the Nencini provisional-reconviction in 2014.

The fact remains - he and his girlfriend had been across the border into Austria when he got the news of the verdict.

He and she then **returned** to Italy and checked into that lodging, where eventually the Carabinieri served notice on the conditions mandated by the court.

Of everything that had gone on over the years, this was the blandest, most straightforward of them all. Guilter-nutters, on the other hand and typically, made it out like The Great Escape, with Sollecito as Steve McQueen going overland by motorcycle to the frontier.

If nothing else, it showed the guilter-nutters being unwilling to be led by evidence, while they invented guilt-sounding scenarios out of whole cloth.
I think it's more than likely that the PGP/TJMK got their information from the completely misleading news media reports that repeatedly used the words "caught" and/or "stopped at the border". Those words strongly imply that Sollecito was attempting to flee Italy which was false.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 12:26 PM   #205
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 804
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
[...]
I suspect that the prosecutor may have requested precautionary detention for Amanda Knox, implying that a request for extradition would be needed; it would be great if this could be verified or not by means of the original documentation.
I'm still trying to find PM Crini's requests. The problem is that the transcripts are not machine readable and somehow protected from being "OCR'ed" by the use of a "standard" OCR procedure. (But I'm working on it )

ETA: I wonder if anyone remembers reporting about these "requests" from back then, because for now I haven't found anything reliable...

Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
For the actual order from Nencini to seize Raffaele Sollecito's passport, I believe that is what's stated in the "Applica" section on pages 4-5.
Yes, the final part reads:
Quote:
viti gli art.li 274 lett. B) e 281 cpp

APPLICA

A Sollecito Raffaele la misura coercitiva del divieto di espatrio e per l'effetto prescrive d'imputato di non uscire dal territorio nazionale senza la autorizzazione del Giudice che procede, disponendo il ritiro aii'irnputato del passaporto e degli aitri documenti di identità validi per l'espatrio.
[...]
google:
Quote:
given the articles 274 lett. B) and 281 cpp

APPLY

In Sollecito Raffaele, the coercive measure of the expatriation ban and due to the effect prescribes the defendant not to leave the national territory without the authorization of the proceeding Judge, ordering the withdrawal of the defendant of the passport and of the other identity documents valid for the 'expatriation.
[...]
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."

Last edited by Methos; 10th November 2019 at 12:35 PM.
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 01:18 PM   #206
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I think it's more than likely that the PGP/TJMK got their information from the completely misleading news media reports that repeatedly used the words "caught" and/or "stopped at the border". Those words strongly imply that Sollecito was attempting to flee Italy which was false.
If they'd been "stopped at the border" while in Austria, that would have meant that someone tried to prevent them from reentering Italy!!!!!

But this small part of the seven-year four-month saga shows **both** how the press willingly and knowingly skewed the record against Sollecito (and Knox), and how the two (now defunct) PMF message boards, as well as TMJK and the fake-Wiki also knowingly skewed things - against the evidence.

But to repeat, this wee episode is one of the most obscure, bland episodes of them all. It proves the lengths some people went to, to dig real low to purposely spread false info detrimental to the then-provisionally convicted, now cleared.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 10th November 2019 at 01:20 PM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 01:22 PM   #207
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I was curious about this 'snowstorm' that no other report mentioned which I found odd. I looked up the weather history for Udine on Jan.30, 2014, the day Sollecito was "caught" at the border.

Odd....no snowstorm was recorded. The weather that day stayed above freezing in the 40's F and was mostly cloudy with some "light rain".

https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/...th=1&year=2014

I suspect Hillary Clinton managed to force the weather history website to post a fake weather report.

ETA: There's probably an email from her somewhere directing them to do so.
If the Mafia-led, Masonic-funded US-media conspiracy could free two obviously guilty people from the clutches of the Italian Supreme Court, as well as pay off lower court judges like Hellmann to keep him in fast cars....

What would it take to fudge a weather report!? C'mon Stacyhs - think!
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 04:13 PM   #208
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
Professor Murphy's book Inside the Cell discussed this case on pp. 33-34. It sounds as if Ms. Lee's underwear snagged a pipe, and that might have been the cause of the transfer. It also sounds as if more than one profile of this worker might have been recovered. It is unclear what her source material was, but I remember reading some news articles at the time (circa 2010).
But, Chris, it was impossible for this to be transfer contamination as Vixen has claimed that it's virtually impossible for DNA to transfer after 24 hours. So, seeing how the source of the DNA had died two years before the murder, one has to ask: was he really dead? Maybe he just faked his death and was really the one who killed Ms. Lee!
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 04:42 PM   #209
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Let's not get diverted with all this irrelevant talk of whether DNA reveals our ethnicity accurately. Numbers' point in bringing it up was to show that "it is not at all uncommon for persons of differing genetic, ethnic or national backgrounds to have some of the same alleles at some loci...". It was relevant because he showed how RS, AK, and RG shared alleles in the bra hook sample. Vixen diverted from that point to discussing if English, French and British ancestry can be distinguished from each other. How is that at all relevant to Number's point or to 165B?

Vixen, will you admit that

1. you have no evidence that Wikileaks found an email from Clinton saying she would look into the case?

2. that Vinci said there was some
a)compatible* DNA of Knox on the bra,
b) he did not say Knox's DNA was on the bra, and
c) he concluded that the DNA could not be used to identify the donor?


3.Will you admit the David Balding's own computer program ruled out Knox's DNA was on the bra?

*Remember that compatibility is not the same thing as matching.
Gosh. I'm beginning to think Vixen is purposely avoiding answering my questions. Should I be hurt?
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 04:28 AM   #210
Methos
Muse
 
Methos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 804
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
[...]
I suspect that the prosecutor may have requested precautionary detention for Amanda Knox, implying that a request for extradition would be needed; it would be great if this could be verified or not by means of the original documentation.
[...]
Finally found it. It's on pages 138-141 of the transcript of the January 20th, 2014 hearing. The exchange between PM Crini and judge Nencini is quite fascinating...
Quote:
Devo in più prospettare anche questa ... dare questa indicazione alla Corte, poi magari la metto a verbale in modo preciso. Prima la spiego un attimo. Cioè a dire, se Loro riterranno di assolvere gli Imputati, il problema non si porrà.
Se Loro riterranno di accogliere le richieste del Pubblico Ministero, il Pubblico Ministero, che è Procuratore Generale e quindi anche Organo, come dire, un po' che ha la responsabilità dell'esecuzione un po' delle pene, certamente si pone il problema che a quel punto la sentenza sarebbe quella che in gergo si qualifica la doppia conforme di merito, se dico bene, la doppia conforme di merito, e quindi da questo punto di vista certamente qual è la richiesta del Procuratore Generale in una situazione nella quale certamente oggi l'imputato - e ne prendo atto - è presente, però ho elementi che lo indicano come in grado di spostarsi non solo sul territorio nazionale?
L'altra Imputata, diciamo, è sostanzialmente estranea, quindi da questo punto di vista la mia richiesta è proprio ritagliata alle esigenze del processo.
Cioè a dire, quando doveste ritenere di accogliere le mie richieste, allora aggiungo anche a quelle la richiesta di emettere una misura che sia - come la posso chiamare - una misura rispetto alla quale - ovviamente non do indicazioni alla corte, non mi permetterei - una misura che sia quantomeno in grado di assicurare la possibilità di esecuzione in concreto della sentenza.
Quindi questo si può verbalizzare in questa forma, ecco: il Procuratore Generale conclude anche perché, ove si dovesse ritenere di accogliere le sue richieste, sia irrogata agli Imputati una misura che qia in concreto in grado, in prospettiva - perché poi la causa chissà che piega potrà prendere - che comunque in prospettiva sia in grado di assicurare la esecuzione della sentenza nel momento in cui dovesse formarsi un giudicato penale di condanna. Ecco, credo di avere ...
PRESIDENTE - Quindi, scusi, Signor Procuratore Generale, sa ho ben capito, cioè la ri'chiesta formale è quella...
P.G. - La posso dettare.
PRESIDENTE - Ecco, se la vuole dettare, cosi almeno...
P.G. - Si.. Il Procuratore Generala richiede che all'esito di eventuale pronunzia di condanna la Corte accompagni la stessa all'applicazione di una misura cautelare che sia idonea ad assicurare l'esecuzione della sentenza nel momento in cui dovesse formarsi un qiudicato di condanna definitivo. Questa sarebbe la... non so se ho...
PRESIDENTE - No, no., . l'importante è che da verbale risulti. No, preferirei che lei lo scrivesse adesso e poi lo rileggiamo. Che cosa ha scritto, signora?
CANCELLIERE - (voce fuori microfono)
PRESIDENTE - Chiede l'applicazione della misura cautelare nei confronti di entrambi gli Imputati.
P. G. - Certo.
PRESIDENTE - Nel tipo e nella forma che la Corte riterrà idonea...
P.G. - Esatto, ad assicurare... ecco, questo è il punto, ad assicurare... il Presidente ha capite e può completare, La ringrazio.
PRESIDENTE - ... ad assicurare l'esecuzione di un eventuale futuro giudicato.
P.G. - Si, esattamente. SI, si, si.
PRESIDENTE - Mi è parso di aver capito questo.
P.G. - Si, sl. Ringrazio il Presidente dell'aiuto.
PRESIDENTE - No, più che altro mi premeva non lasciare l'aula se non con la certezza di aver verhalizzato.
P.G. - No. no, no, no. Io capisco che...
PRESIDENTE - Siccome sono passaggi, come voi...
P.G. - ... capisco che il passaggio può essere delicato.
PRESIDENTE - ... insomma, delicati della...
P.G. - E quindi io l'ho dettato apposta, perché cosi... ora il Presidente l'ha, come dire, ancor meglio ...
PRESTIDENTE - Va behe. Quindi è chiaro che poi le Difese su questo punto interloquiranno nella parte della replica.
P.G. - Delle esigenze ... va bene.
PRESIDENTE - Perché...
P.G, - Io ho finito Io ringrazio la Corte dell'attenzione.
PRESIDENTE - Bene.
P.G. - E quindi creda a questo punto non ho nemmeno più diritto a successivi interventi, quindi saluto i Signori Giudici e Giurati e quindi mi congedo da loro, diciamo, dal punto di vista della parola.
PRESIDENTE - Allora, diciamo che facciamo adesso l'interruzione che avevamo programato. Sono le 14:00, almeno mi risulta. Ci rivediamo per le 15:00) e iniziermo quindi le repliche con le Parti Civili. A1Le ore 15:00 ci vediamo.
(SOSPENSIONE)

google:
Quote:
I must also present this ... give this indication to the Court, then maybe I put it in the record in a precise way. I'll explain it first. That is to say, if they think they will acquit the defendants, the problem will not arise.
If they think they will accept the requests of the Public Prosecutor, the Public Prosecutor, who is the Attorney General and therefore also the Body, how to say, a bit 'that has the responsibility for the execution of some of the penalties, certainly the question arises that to that point the sentence would be that in jargon the double conformation of merit is qualified, if I say well, the double conformance of merit, and therefore from this point of view certainly what is the request of the Attorney General in a situation in which certainly today 'defendant - and I acknowledge it - is present, but do I have elements that indicate that he is able to move not only on the national territory?
The other Imputed, let's say, is substantially extraneous, so from this point of view my request is precisely tailored to the needs of the process.
That is to say, when you consider yourself accepting my requests, then I also add to those the request to issue a measure that is - as I can call it - a measure with respect to which - obviously I don't give indications to the court, I wouldn't allow myself - a a measure that is at least able to ensure the possibility of concrete execution of the sentence.
So this can be verbalized in this form, here: the Attorney General also concludes why, if one were to consider accepting his requests, a measure is imposed on the Defendants that in practice can, in perspective - because then the cause who knows what fold will be able to take - in any case in perspective is able to ensure the execution of the sentence at the moment in which a criminal conviction should be formed. Here, I think I have ...
PRESIDENT - So, excuse me, Mr. Attorney General, I know I understood correctly, that is the formal inquiry is that ...
P. G. - I can dictate it.
PRESIDENT - Here, if you want to dictate, so at least ...
P. G. - Yes. The Prosecutor Generala requests that upon the outcome of a possible sentence the Court shall accompany the Court to the application of a precautionary measure that is suitable to ensure the execution of the sentence at the moment in which a final conviction should be formed. . This would be the ... I don't know if I ...
PRESIDENT - No, no.,. the important thing is that the report shows. No, I would prefer you to write it now and then read it again. What did you write, ma'am?
REGISTRAR - (voice outside microphone)
PRESIDENT - Calls for the application of the precautionary measure against both Defendants.
P. G. - Sure.
PRESIDENT - In the type and form the Court deems appropriate ...
P. G. - Exactly, to ensure ... here, this is the point, to ensure ... the President has understood and can complete, thank you.
PRESIDENT - ... to ensure the execution of any future judgement.
P. G. - Yes exactly. Yes Yes Yes.
PRESIDENT - I thought I understood this.
P. G. - Yes, sl. I thank the President of the aid.
PRESIDENT - No, more than anything I was anxious not to leave the classroom except with the certainty of having authenticated.
P. G. - No. No, no, no. I understand that ...
PRESIDENT - As they are passages, like you ...
P. G. - ... I understand that the passage can be delicate.
PRESIDENT - ... in short, delicate ...
P. G. - And so I dictated it on purpose, because so ... now the President has it, how to say, even better ...
PRESTIDENT - Va behe. So it is clear that then the Defenses on this point will intervene in the part of the reply.
P. G. - Needs ... okay.
PRESIDENT - Why ...
P.G, - I have finished I thank the Court of attention.
PRESIDENT - Good.
P. G. - And therefore believe at this point I do not even have the right to subsequent interventions, so I greet the Judges and Jurors and then I take leave of them, say, from the point of view of the word.
PRESIDENT - So, let's say we do the interruption we had planned now. It's 2:00 pm, at least I know. See you again for 3:00 pm) and then start the replicas with the Civil Parties. See you at 15:00.
(SUSPENSION)
__________________
"Found a typo? You can keep it..."
Methos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 05:39 AM   #211
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
Finally found it. It's on pages 138-141 of the transcript of the January 20th, 2014 hearing. The exchange between PM Crini and judge Nencini is quite fascinating...

google:
Have I read this correctly?

Meaning: am I correct in reading into this that PM Crini's rationale for requesting preventative detention was to guarantee the "execution of sentence" should the ISC eventually sign off on the convictions?

And that further, that Crini fully expected that the then-future Cassazione judgement would be acquittal!?!?!?

Am I reading that right?
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 11th November 2019 at 06:04 AM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 08:51 AM   #212
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,277
Originally Posted by Methos View Post
Finally found it. It's on pages 138-141 of the transcript of the January 20th, 2014 hearing. The exchange between PM Crini and judge Nencini is quite fascinating...

google:
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
Have I read this correctly?

Meaning: am I correct in reading into this that PM Crini's rationale for requesting preventative detention was to guarantee the "execution of sentence" should the ISC eventually sign off on the convictions?

And that further, that Crini fully expected that the then-future Cassazione judgement would be acquittal!?!?!?

Am I reading that right?
First, a minor technical language issue in the transcript and its translation.

Where the Italian transcript has "Va behe" there is no translation given. Collins Reverso suggests that "behe" should be "bene". The translation for the phrase "Va bene" is "Alright".

Second, although the prosecutor does not explicitly say that the expectation is that the CSC will overturn the verdict, it is remarkable that the prosecutor is reluctant to request any execution of the provisional judgment of the Nencini Appeal Court and leaves it to the judge.

In my opinion, this suggests that the prosecutor was not at all confident that the Nencini Appeal Court provisional judgment of conviction would be upheld. It also appears that the prosecutor was concerned that an order for detention would lead to a separate appeal by the defense against detention which would be accepted by the CSC. It would follow that the prosecutor did not wish to pursue extradition and detention for Amanda Knox, and would not have requested the Minister of Justice to initiate an extradition.

This supports the hypothesis that the Nencini Court of Appeal provisional conviction was merely an attempt to set up judicial protection for the police and Mignini from prosecution for their misconduct.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 09:11 AM   #213
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
First, a minor technical language issue in the transcript and its translation.

Where the Italian transcript has "Va behe" there is no translation given. Collins Reverso suggests that "behe" should be "bene". The translation for the phrase "Va bene" is "Alright".

Second, although the prosecutor does not explicitly say that the expectation is that the CSC will overturn the verdict, it is remarkable that the prosecutor is reluctant to request any execution of the provisional judgment of the Nencini Appeal Court and leaves it to the judge.

In my opinion, this suggests that the prosecutor was not at all confident that the Nencini Appeal Court provisional judgment of conviction would be upheld. It also appears that the prosecutor was concerned that an order for detention would lead to a separate appeal by the defense against detention which would be accepted by the CSC. It would follow that the prosecutor did not wish to pursue extradition and detention for Amanda Knox, and would not have requested the Minister of Justice to initiate an extradition.

This supports the hypothesis that the Nencini Court of Appeal provisional conviction was merely an attempt to set up judicial protection for the police and Mignini from prosecution for their misconduct.
30 Jan 2014 Day 11 of the Nencini hearing it was established:

Both parties have an automatic appeal to the Supreme Court. Extradition requests and detainment of Sollecito will be deferred until then.

20 Jan 2014 Day 10, Crini:

finished by urging the court to convict the pair and to take precautionary measures to ensure they serve their sentence, such as the removal of Sollecito’s passport, house arrest or immediate detention.

Media reaction from The Daily Beast has the following reaction:



Conventional wisdom in Italy, based on how presiding judge Alessandro Nencini has been ruling so far and how the high court ruled on the acquittal, is that Knox and Sollecito stand a good chance of having their murder convictions upheld.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!

Last edited by Vixen; 11th November 2019 at 09:25 AM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 10:27 AM   #214
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,277
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
First, a minor technical language issue in the transcript and its translation.

Where the Italian transcript has "Va behe" there is no translation given. Collins Reverso suggests that "behe" should be "bene". The translation for the phrase "Va bene" is "Alright".

Second, although the prosecutor does not explicitly say that the expectation is that the CSC will overturn the verdict, it is remarkable that the prosecutor is reluctant to request any execution of the provisional judgment of the Nencini Appeal Court and leaves it to the judge.

In my opinion, this suggests that the prosecutor was not at all confident that the Nencini Appeal Court provisional judgment of conviction would be upheld. It also appears that the prosecutor was concerned that an order for detention would lead to a separate appeal by the defense against detention which would be accepted by the CSC. It would follow that the prosecutor did not wish to pursue extradition and detention for Amanda Knox, and would not have requested the Minister of Justice to initiate an extradition.

This supports the hypothesis that the Nencini Court of Appeal provisional conviction was merely an attempt to set up judicial protection for the police and Mignini from prosecution for their misconduct.
The translation of some sections needs some further analysis. For example, the Italian text states:

"P.G. - Si.. Il Procuratore Generala richiede che all'esito di eventuale pronunzia di condanna la Corte accompagni la stessa all'applicazione di una misura cautelare che sia idonea ad assicurare l'esecuzione della sentenza nel momento in cui dovesse formarsi un qiudicato di condanna definitivo. Questa sarebbe la... non so se ho... "

By breaking this up into clauses or phrases, I get the following from Google Translate:

"P. G. - Yes. The Attorney General [Prosecutor General]
demands [requires, requests]
that to the outcome of a possible sentence [conviction]
the Court accompanies
the same to [with] the application [of]
a precautionary measure that is suitable to ensure the execution of the sentence at the time
in which it {the Supreme Court of Cassation, assuming an appeal by the defendants} should form
a definitive sentence of conviction.

This would be ... I don't know if I ..."

This seems to leave it up to the judge to decide any measure and not a demand for detention of the defendants upon provisional conviction. It is clearly not a demand or request for detention. The final disposition in terms of detention or other measure against the defendants is to be left to the final definitive judgment.

ETA: The prosecutor had the authority to appeal the Nencini Appeal Court decision on the security measures, by asking the CSC to increase the measures to detention or to refer those measures to another appeal court. The prosecutor did not appeal the Nencini Appeal Court decision of security measures consisting of no detention.

Last edited by Numbers; 11th November 2019 at 10:54 AM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 11:26 AM   #215
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
There you are, Vixen! Would you care to address my questions now? If not, why not?

Vixen, will you admit that

1. you have no evidence that Wikileaks found an email from Clinton saying she would look into the case?

2. that Vinci said there was some
a)compatible* DNA of Knox on the bra,
b) he did not say Knox's DNA was on the bra, and
c) he concluded that the DNA could not be used to identify the donor?


3.Will you admit the David Balding's own computer program ruled out Knox's DNA was on the bra?

*Remember that compatibility is not the same thing as matching.

ETA: 4. Will you admit that there was no snowstorm the night that Sollecito checked into a hotel in
Udine and that the evidence shows he was not attempting to flee Italy?

Last edited by Stacyhs; 11th November 2019 at 11:41 AM.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 11:56 AM   #216
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
There you are, Vixen! Would you care to address my questions now? If not, why not?

Vixen, will you admit that

1. you have no evidence that Wikileaks found an email from Clinton saying she would look into the case?

2. that Vinci said there was some
a)compatible* DNA of Knox on the bra,
b) he did not say Knox's DNA was on the bra, and
c) he concluded that the DNA could not be used to identify the donor?


3.Will you admit the David Balding's own computer program ruled out Knox's DNA was on the bra?

*Remember that compatibility is not the same thing as matching.

ETA: 4. Will you admit that there was no snowstorm the night that Sollecito checked into a hotel in
Udine and that the evidence shows he was not attempting to flee Italy?
'Compatibility' is the correct legal term used in court to identify fingerprint, footprint, shoeprint or DNA sample. This is because these qualities do not need to be matched absolutely. Ten to eighteen key points where they do match is statistically significant that the print or DNA was not left by some random person but the person identified as it being 'compatible' to.

Local weather condition can be specific to small areas for short periods of time and thus do not necessarily get recorded. Newspapers generally show an overall weather symbol. Perhaps a sun peeking out behind a cloud, or a few drops of rain, or just cloud.

You are talking rubbish when you say because you can't find a mention it can't have happened.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 12:53 PM   #217
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 45,510
Compatible absolutely is not the word used when a definite identification has been made. Compatible with only means that it can't be ruled out, not that it definitely is.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 12:55 PM   #218
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
'Compatibility' is the correct legal term used in court to identify fingerprint, footprint, shoeprint or DNA sample.
I quoted several instances from the Massei Report and from Stefanoni where the term "compatible" was NOT used. Instead they identified the DNA as being Knox's, Kercher's, Guede's, and Sollecito's so your claim has been already proved wrong.

Stefanoni:
Quote:
And the material on the blade matches the victim.[/hilite]
Quote:
These samples match Knox and the victim
Massei:
Quote:
Amanda's and Raffaele's DNA were both found on the cigarette
Quote:
no other object apart from the
hooks was shown to carry Raffaele Sollecito's DNA
Nowhere does the word "compatible" appear.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post12884509


Quote:
This is because these qualities do not need to be matched absolutely. Ten to eighteen key points where they do match is statistically significant that the print or DNA was not left by some random person but the person identified as it being 'compatible' to.
Stop the irrelevant distractions, Vixen. None of that has anything to do with the questions you are trying so hard to avoid answering:

Did Vinci say that Knox's DNA was on the bra hook?

Did Vinci say that the samples could not be used to identify the source?


Quote:
Local weather condition can be specific to small areas for short periods of time and thus do not necessarily get recorded. Newspapers generally show an overall weather symbol. Perhaps a sun peeking out behind a cloud, or a few drops of rain, or just cloud.
Good lord, Vixen. Just STOP. This was the hourly detailed weather report for the town of UDINE showing temps were entirely in the 40's and partly cloudy with only some light rain. Do you seriously want to claim that there was a localized snowstorm so bad that Sollecito had to take cover at a hotel?


Quote:
You are talking rubbish when you say because you can't find a mention it can't have happened.
LOL. Stop lying about what I said...which was:

Quote:
I was curious about this 'snowstorm' that no other report mentioned which I found odd. I looked up the weather history for Udine on Jan.30, 2014, the day Sollecito was "caught" at the border.
(#203, part 30)

If you want to claim there was an unreported freak snowstorm right over Sollecito forcing him to abandon his flight to Austria, then go ahead. There is no law preventing you from making such a ludicrous and completely unsupported assertion.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 01:00 PM   #219
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
deleted

Last edited by Stacyhs; 11th November 2019 at 01:04 PM. Reason: misread
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 02:08 PM   #220
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,840
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
'Compatibility' is the correct legal term used in court to identify fingerprint, footprint, shoeprint or DNA sample.


Ahhh there you go, inventing your own "facts" once again! I wait with bated breath to see just how astonishing the next one will be!!
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 02:44 PM   #221
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,277
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Compatible absolutely is not the word used when a definite identification has been made. Compatible with only means that it can't be ruled out, not that it definitely is.
There are three points regarding using "compatible" or "probable" in an attempt to secure a conviction in most jurisdictions, including specifically Italy:

1. Italian law CPP Article 533 requires that proof of guilt must be established beyond a reasonable doubt in order for a court (judge) to legally pronounce a sentence of conviction.

2. Italian law CPP Article 192 paragraph 2 requires that a court (judge) cannot infer the existence of a fact from circumstantial evidence unless that evidence is serious, precise, and consistent. The requirements of precision and consistency would thus rule out use of circumstantial evidence that was only "compatible" with an identification of a suspect in connection with a crime. To identify a suspect in connection with a crime, the evidence must be precise and consistent.

3. In the Knox - Sollecito case, the Massei and Nencini courts did not follow Italian laws including CPP Articles 192 and 153 in provisionally convicting Knox and Sollecito of the murder/rape of Kercher.

ETA:

The Italian text of CPP Article 192.2:

2. L'esistenza di un fatto non può essere desunta da indizi a meno che questi siano gravi, precisi e concordanti.

Google translation:

2. The existence of a fact cannot be deduced from indications unless these are serious, precise and consistent.

(The other translation above is from The Italian Code of Criminal Procedure: Critical essays and English translation, ed. Gialuz, Luparia, and Scarpa; Kluwer (c) 2014)

The meaning of "serious" here is "important", "significant", "consequential".

Source of the Italian text: https://lexscripta.it/codici/codice-...e/articolo-192

Last edited by Numbers; 11th November 2019 at 03:15 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 03:27 PM   #222
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Compatible absolutely is not the word used when a definite identification has been made. Compatible with only means that it can't be ruled out, not that it definitely is.
As I said:

This is because these qualities do not need to be matched absolutely. Ten to eighteen key points where they do match is statistically significant that the print or DNA was not left by some random person but the person identified as it being 'compatible' to.

'Compatible' or 'not compatible' are the words they use in court.


Perhaps Stacyhs had a bad Italian translation that came up with 'matched' instead. The translations of transcripts on 'themurderofmeredithkercher.com' correctly uses the word, 'compatible'. Why? Because it is a court of law and only BARD is required not 100% absolute proof.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!

Last edited by Vixen; 11th November 2019 at 03:28 PM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 03:32 PM   #223
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I quoted several instances from the Massei Report and from Stefanoni where the term "compatible" was NOT used. Instead they identified the DNA as being Knox's, Kercher's, Guede's, and Sollecito's so your claim has been already proved wrong.

Stefanoni:




Massei:




Nowhere does the word "compatible" appear.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post12884509




Stop the irrelevant distractions, Vixen. None of that has anything to do with the questions you are trying so hard to avoid answering:

Did Vinci say that Knox's DNA was on the bra hook?

Did Vinci say that the samples could not be used to identify the source?




Good lord, Vixen. Just STOP. This was the hourly detailed weather report for the town of UDINE showing temps were entirely in the 40's and partly cloudy with only some light rain. Do you seriously want to claim that there was a localized snowstorm so bad that Sollecito had to take cover at a hotel?




LOL. Stop lying about what I said...which was:

(#203, part 30)

If you want to claim there was an unreported freak snowstorm right over Sollecito forcing him to abandon his flight to Austria, then go ahead. There is no law preventing you from making such a ludicrous and completely unsupported assertion.
Poor translations.

Are you sure you weren't looking at weather forecasts. I get a daily hourly weather forecast from BBC and it failed to mention the quite heavy snow fall we had a few days ago. Anyone looking back will think, ah, this proves it never snowed because the forecast doesn't say it.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 04:49 PM   #224
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
As I said:

This is because these qualities do not need to be matched absolutely. Ten to eighteen key points where they do match is statistically significant that the print or DNA was not left by some random person but the person identified as it being 'compatible' to.

'Compatible' or 'not compatible' are the words they use in court.
Perhaps you need to read the quotes I provided earlier from the Massei MR yet again. They are quite clear that they are identifying the source and do not use the word "compatible" or "matched". Next excuse!
Quote:
Amanda's and Raffaele's DNA were both found on the cigarette
stub,
Quote:
no other object apart from the hooks was shown to carry Raffaele Sollecito's DNA
Quote:
trace A yielded the genetic profile of Knox and trace B yielded the genetic profile of the victim.


Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Perhaps Stacyhs had a bad Italian translation that came up with 'matched' instead. The translations of transcripts on 'themurderofmeredithkercher.com' correctly uses the word, 'compatible'. Why? Because it is a court of law and only BARD is required not 100% absolute proof.


Try again. Only one quote uses the word "matched" and it is from an English language newspaper article written by Barbie Nadeau. As you and TJMK have said many times, Barbie is fluent in Italian and reported Stefanoni as testifying in court:


Quote:
And the material on the blade matches the victim.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/mix-of...rs-blood-found

Try again.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 04:51 PM   #225
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Poor translations.

Are you sure you weren't looking at weather forecasts. I get a daily hourly weather forecast from BBC and it failed to mention the quite heavy snow fall we had a few days ago. Anyone looking back will think, ah, this proves it never snowed because the forecast doesn't say it.
Just stop, Vixen.

Either present evidence or move on.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 05:08 PM   #226
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 45,510
The blood found at the scene was of blood group O+. This is compatible with the suspect. The suspect is still in the frame. But it's also compatible with a huge number of other people. It doesn't implicate the suspect, it's not incriminating.

Conversely, if the DNA in that blood is sequenced in its entirety and found to correspond exactly to the suspect's genome, we would not be using the word "compatible" any more.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 05:20 PM   #227
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Poor translations.
Hahahahahaha! See above and stop embarrassing yourself.

Quote:
Are you sure you weren't looking at weather forecasts. I get a daily hourly weather forecast from BBC and it failed to mention the quite heavy snow fall we had a few days ago. Anyone looking back will think, ah, this proves it never snowed because the forecast doesn't say it.
No, Vixen. They were not weather forecasts; they were weather RECORDS or HISTORY as stated in the link.

The facts are:

1. There was no snowstorm on Jan. 30, 2014.
2. Sollecito's car was videotaped at 3 PM 16 miles south of Udine which is 37
miles from the Austrian border which places him 53 miles from the border.
3. It does not take 10 hours to drive 53 miles in light rain. (3 PM to 1:00 AM)
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 05:35 PM   #228
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The blood found at the scene was of blood group O+. This is compatible with the suspect. The suspect is still in the frame. But it's also compatible with a huge number of other people. It doesn't implicate the suspect, it's not incriminating.

Conversely, if the DNA in that blood is sequenced in its entirety and found to correspond exactly to the suspect's genome, we would not be using the word "compatible" any more.
Exactly. O+ is the most common blood type in the world so there are A LOT of "compatible" people.

Before DNA, blood type was often used to rule out paternity, but could not be used to identify paternity. It was a matter of NOT being compatible rather than compatible.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 09:06 PM   #229
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,780
Erin Murphy's book Inside the Cell

There is a bit more on the deceased man's DNA within the Annie Le case here, which is excerpted from her book. "But a second person’s DNA was also found, ominously recovered in significant quantities from samples that included the waistband of the victim’s underwear. "

Her discussion of the Gary Letterman case is very helpful, and Leiterman's DNA along with John Ruelas' DNA found on items from the Jane Mixer murder is a good example of DNA contamination. Her book does not deal directly with the Knox/Sollecito case, but it has clear lessons about it involving DNA.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 11th November 2019 at 09:08 PM.
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 11:32 PM   #230
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,277
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The blood found at the scene was of blood group O+. This is compatible with the suspect. The suspect is still in the frame. But it's also compatible with a huge number of other people. It doesn't implicate the suspect, it's not incriminating.

Conversely, if the DNA in that blood is sequenced in its entirety and found to correspond exactly to the suspect's genome, we would not be using the word "compatible" any more.
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Exactly. O+ is the most common blood type in the world so there are A LOT of "compatible" people.

Before DNA, blood type was often used to rule out paternity, but could not be used to identify paternity. It was a matter of NOT being compatible rather than compatible.
It's interesting to attempt a quantitative comparison of an imprecise identification test, such as a test of blood type (aka blood group), which is able to produce either weak evidence of compatibility or strong evidence of non-compatibility, with a test such as STR DNA profiling, considered highly precise if done according to proper international protocols.

The ABO and Rh blood groups occur throughout human populations, but the distributions of blood group frequencies differs somewhat among various countries or geographical regions. As stated in the posts quoted, O+ is the most common group, but the percent of population with that group ranges from a high of about 86% in Chile to a low of about 27% in a number of countries and in South Asia. The least common group, AB-, ranges from a high of about 1% to a low of about 0.01%; the US percentage is about 0.6%, which would amount to roughly 1.5 million persons with that blood type. Thus, it is not uncommon for two individuals to have the same blood type and an identification test based on blood type with certainty can show strong evidence of non-compatibility.

To illustrate the potential precision of STR DNA profiling, I present an idealized and naive model using 15 pairs of 6-sided fair dice; each pair represents an STR locus, and the number of pairs models Stefanoni's use of 15 STR loci for the autosomal chromosomes. In the model, for each locus pair, one die represents the mother's and the other the father's contribution. However, the detection method cannot distinguish the paternal from the maternal contribution, so while there are 42 possible outcomes per model locus, the probability of any one outcome at any one model locus = 2/42 = 1/21*. Assuming independence of the model loci, the probability of any one unique outcome for the 15 model loci = (1/21)15, that is, about 2 x 10-40, a very small number but, of course, not zero. The modeling exercise illustrates the high level of precision that potentially can be achieved, although the result in a real case may benefit from consideration of the allele frequencies in the population. The result does not apply to a mixture of DNA, where a similar model would require multiple pairs of dice at each locus, and one would not know which dice to pair at each locus.

*Alternatively, one could assume only the upper diagonal (or only the lower diagonal) contributes, since the maternal and paternal contributions can't be distinguished in the detection (for example, 6,1 cannot be distinguished from 1,6). There are 21 members in the upper (or lower) diagonal. Again, the probability of any one result for a pair of dice is then 1/21.

Last edited by Numbers; 11th November 2019 at 11:46 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 07:47 AM   #231
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,750
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The blood found at the scene was of blood group O+. This is compatible with the suspect. The suspect is still in the frame. But it's also compatible with a huge number of other people. It doesn't implicate the suspect, it's not incriminating.
I know next to nothing about any of this, except for what is googleable. Meaning, I am probably like a lot of Italian judges, except as M/B pointed out in their 2015 motivation report judges there tend to see themselves as the expert of the expert.

Still, as this googleable chart of frequency/rarity of blood types shows, "compatibility" can mean many things depending on the context:

Quote:
What's the rarest blood type by % of population?
AB-negative (.6 percent)
B-negative (1.5 percent)
AB-positive (3.4 percent)
A-negative (6.3 percent)
O-negative (6.6 percent)
B-positive (8.5 percent)
A-positive (35.7 percent)
O-positive (37.4 percent)

So, if your suspect has O-positive blood and you find O-positive blood at the scene, compatibility doesn't mean much.

But if your suspect has AB-negative, and AB-negative is found at the scene, compatibility means more.

However, just saying something is compatible with no context means nothing. One could go through the 119 instances of compatibility which Judge Massei found in his 2010 guilt motivations report and dismiss them all on the grounds above.

It's why the 2015 Supreme Court's motivation report added "specific" and "precise" to issues of compatibility..... which when you do to the issues in this prosecution renders any guilt case to the dustbin.
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 12th November 2019 at 08:12 AM.
Bill Williams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 08:23 AM   #232
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,277
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
I know next to nothing about any of this, except for what is googleable. Meaning, I am probably like a lot of Italian judges, except as M/B pointed out in their 2015 motivation report judges there tend to see themselves as the expert of the expert.

Still, as this googleable chart of frequency/rarity of blood types shows, "compatibility" can mean many things depending on the context:


So, if your suspect has O-positive blood and you find O-positive blood at the scene, compatibility doesn't mean much.

But if your suspect has AB-negative, and AB-negative is found at the scene, compatibility means more.

However, just saying something is compatible with no context means nothing. One could go through the 119 instances of compatibility which Judge Massei found in his 2010 guilt motivations report and dismiss them all on the grounds above.

It's why the 2015 Supreme Court's motivation report added "specific" and "precise" to issues of compatibility..... which when you do to the issues in this prosecution renders any guilt case to the dustbin.
Yes.

And the Massei court judgment of provisional conviction did not follow the requirements of Italian procedural law, CPP Articles 192.2 and 533. The Hellmann appeal court quashed the Massei judgment on these legal grounds.

The Nencini appeal court judgment of provisional conviction also violated CPP Articles 192.2 and 533.

Therefore, the Marasca CSC panel, as a matter of law, quashed the Nencini appeal court judgment and finally acquitted Knox and Sollecito of the murder/rape charges.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 10:10 AM   #233
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The blood found at the scene was of blood group O+. This is compatible with the suspect. The suspect is still in the frame. But it's also compatible with a huge number of other people. It doesn't implicate the suspect, it's not incriminating.

Conversely, if the DNA in that blood is sequenced in its entirety and found to correspond exactly to the suspect's genome, we would not be using the word "compatible" any more.
No, blood group O would not be 'compatible' with a huge number of other people. It MATCHES more than half the population. You are either group O or you are not. In a forensic crime scene this means sweet zippo.

A DNA sequence does not have to 'match in its entirety' in a criminal court. All that's needed is a ten-allele match in an English court to provide sound suspect identification (together with other evidence).

In the Kercher case 15-alleles were found of Mez on Raff's knife and a full-house 17-alleles of Sollecito found on the victim's underwear.

Not even the defence could argue with this.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 10:17 AM   #234
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
I know next to nothing about any of this, except for what is googleable. Meaning, I am probably like a lot of Italian judges, except as M/B pointed out in their 2015 motivation report judges there tend to see themselves as the expert of the expert.

Still, as this googleable chart of frequency/rarity of blood types shows, "compatibility" can mean many things depending on the context:


So, if your suspect has O-positive blood and you find O-positive blood at the scene, compatibility doesn't mean much.

But if your suspect has AB-negative, and AB-negative is found at the scene, compatibility means more.

However, just saying something is compatible with no context means nothing. One could go through the 119 instances of compatibility which Judge Massei found in his 2010 guilt motivations report and dismiss them all on the grounds above.

It's why the 2015 Supreme Court's motivation report added "specific" and "precise" to issues of compatibility..... which when you do to the issues in this prosecution renders any guilt case to the dustbin.
My mother had a rare blood group (A or AB) and was in constant demand by the Blood Transfusion services. She received several nice brooches from them as a 'thank you'.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 10:42 AM   #235
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 45,510
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, blood group O would not be 'compatible' with a huge number of other people. It MATCHES more than half the population. You are either group O or you are not. In a forensic crime scene this means sweet zippo.

I do not think these words (or indeed many words) mean what you think they do. That is precisely the meaning of "compatible". Any finding of blood of group O+ is "compatible" with - well, me, and an awful lot of other people.

If somoene is not O+ then the blood is incompatible with them, and rules them out. But compatible just means that you're not ruled out. Not that you have been implicated.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 10:54 AM   #236
whoanellie
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 704
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, blood group O would not be 'compatible' with a huge number of other people. It MATCHES more than half the population. You are either group O or you are not. In a forensic crime scene this means sweet zippo.
This reads like something run back and forth through Google translate a couple of times. I have no idea what you're trying to say but i'm pretty sure you don't either.
whoanellie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 10:57 AM   #237
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 18,942
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I do not think these words (or indeed many words) mean what you think they do. That is precisely the meaning of "compatible". Any finding of blood of group O+ is "compatible" with - well, me, and an awful lot of other people.

If somoene is not O+ then the blood is incompatible with them, and rules them out. But compatible just means that you're not ruled out. Not that you have been implicated.
It's nice to hear the layman examples of you and Stacyhs when she quotes a newspaper journalist.

Heck, you're not in court, you can use any term you like.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 11:23 AM   #238
Numbers
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,277
Those interested in UK standards for DNA STR profiling in forensics may wish to see the following:

https://royalsociety.org/-/media/abo...for-courts.pdf

Here's two quotes from the above source:

"The frequency of occurrence of a specific allele (ie a specific number of repeating units) at the tested locus in a specific population provides a measure of how common that allele is in that population. This information is essential for calculating match probabilities. If only one STR were analysed, there would be many people with the same allele, purely by chance. It is therefore necessary to analyse a number of different STR loci to ensure that the chance of two unrelated people having matching DNA profiles is very small. Over time, the number of different STR loci analysed has increased as technology has developed. Since 2014 in the UK, 16 loci are examined. In some Scottish cases, 23 loci are examined."

"The principal method of forensic DNA analysis is to consider the profile of the STRs. If only one STR section of DNA were analysed, many people would share the same DNA profile. Therefore, it is necessary to analyse a number of different STRs to ensure that the chance of two unrelated people’s STR profiles matching is acceptably small. Over time, the number of STRs analysed in human DNA profiling has been increased to the point that the chance of two unrelated people sharing the same DNA profile has become infinitesimally small. Table 1 illustrates the evolution of the numbers of STRs analysed. There are various commercial analytical kits containing the chemicals required for the analysis of groups of STRs at the same time. These kits are called multiplexes. In addition to the STRs, each of the systems also includes a test to determine whether the sample comes from a male or a female."

The UK used 10 loci in their DNA profile testing prior to 2014, but abandoned that as inadequate, and since 2014 have used 16 loci in their DNA profile testing. In Scotland, 23 loci are used. (See Appendix A1.2 of the source.)

To propose, as some PGP apparently do, that a partial match of DNA profiles is evidence of identity is absurd.

In analogy, suppose we encounter persons named "John Allen Johnson", "John Brian Johnson", and "John Bryan Johnson". Should we then suppose that any two these three John Johnsons are the same person? Similarly, if two DNA profiles of 16 loci each happen to be identical in some 10, 11, or even 15 loci, should they be assumed to come from the same individual?

It is clear that one cannot make that assumption; if two individuals are shown to be different in even one DNA locus of, for example, 16 STR loci, they are obviously different persons. If two individuals were the same in all 16 STR loci, there would be a strong probability that they were identical twins.

Last edited by Numbers; 12th November 2019 at 11:34 AM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 12:20 PM   #239
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
It's nice to hear the layman examples of you and Stacyhs when she quotes a newspaper journalist.

LOL! Exactly what are you, Vixen, other than a layman? You have a long history of giving 'examples'. May we see your scientific credentials? What? You have none? SHOCK!

I notice that you don't dispute the truth of those examples; instead you attack Rolfe and me. Why is that?

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Heck, you're not in court, you can use any term you like.
No, a credible journalist cannot "use any term" they "like". A credible journalist, when QUOTING someone, will repeat exactly what was said, not "any term" they "like".

Barbie Nadeau, that paragon of journalistic integrity so often touted by the PGP, QUOTED Stefanoni's testimony. If Barbie misquoted what Stefanoni said, then that's on her.

But let's get back to the subject of the discussion which was, as you claimed:

Quote:
As I said:

This is because these qualities do not need to be matched absolutely. Ten to eighteen key points where they do match is statistically significant that the print or DNA was not left by some random person but the person identified as it being 'compatible' to.

'Compatible' or 'not compatible' are the words they use in court.
(post #231)

Here's an interesting quote from Stefanoni's testimony:

Quote:
DOMANDA – Ed un profilo genetico invece singolo?

RISPOSTA – Non è compatibile, l’individuazione è certa.
Quote:
QUESTION - And a single genetic profile instead?

ANSWER - It is not compatible, the identification is certain.
http://themurderofmeredithkercher.co...%27s_Testimony

But I thought you said they always use the the word 'compatible' or 'not compatible' in court?
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 12:30 PM   #240
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 14,435
I see Vixen is still refusing to answer my questions. What could possibly be the reason why? Hmmmmmm.....
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:26 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.