|
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. |
5th November 2019, 03:02 PM | #81 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
In the first locus there were eleven and twelve STR's (=Knox), 29 and 30 in the second, eight and eleven in the third, nothing in the fourth and a possible of fifteen in the fifth. Ten out of sixteen loci have peaks that match Knox.
The odds against that happening at random are extremely remote. Vinci would say it 'can't be considered' wouldn't he, but Pascali walked off the case shortly after his report was published. A common reason for lawyers doing this is that they no longer believe their client. |
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
5th November 2019, 03:05 PM | #82 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
5th November 2019, 03:06 PM | #83 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
Oh it may be "well known" in crapholes such as TJMK (yeah, right, true justice for Meredith Kercher...) that the US State Department was instrumental in "getting (Knox and Sollecito) released". But in the real, non-Tin-Hat world of critical thinkers, Vixen, it's not "well known" at all. In fact, more than that, there's not one shred of evidence that the US State Dept had any influence whatsoever on the reasoning and verdict of the Marasca SC panel. Of course, if you DO happen to possess credible, reliable evidence that the US State Department intervened to the extent that it was that department's intervention that "got the pair released", then please supply it not only to us here, but also to the world's media. I'm nigh-on certain that if indeed there were such evidence, it would make media headlines at least in the US, the UK and Italy. On the other hand, if you don't possess such evidence (and I know you don't, because no such evidence exists), then maybe stop making ridiculous and entirely unsupportable claims such as this. One might even correctly call them lies, Vixen. |
5th November 2019, 03:10 PM | #84 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
LMAO "Police believe". Where's this sheet then, Vixen? Was it the sheet that was found, in situ, on Kercher's bed as her bottom sheet? Did someone remove Kercher's bed's bottom sheet, place it on the floor, move Kercher's body onto the sheet, pull the body using the sheet, then move the body back off the sheet, and re-make the bed with the (almost blood-free, other than the imprint of Guede's knife) bottom sheet? Or was it some other sheet, Vixen? If so, where is this other sheet? What happened to it? Where had it been originally? Evidence: you know, that rather important component......... |
5th November 2019, 03:11 PM | #85 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
Er, she's claiming nine out of her own loci would match Knox's PCR showing.
If you can't calculate that is a likely lie - especially with her being Italian and Knox German and no known relationship - the chances of the pair sharing nine pairs of alleles is a massive fib and utterly despicable in someone claiming to be acting in the role of an independent forensic expert witness. Designed to bring her profession into disrepute. |
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
5th November 2019, 03:12 PM | #86 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
|
5th November 2019, 03:13 PM | #87 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
5th November 2019, 03:14 PM | #88 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
You STILL don't understand what this is all about..... Vecchiotti is NOT talking about her DNA typing matching with Knox's. Vecchiotti is talking about her DNA typing matching with the large admixture of real peaks, stutters and noise on the eGram, to a greater degree than Knox's "match". Seriously - you still can't understand this? |
5th November 2019, 03:16 PM | #89 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
5th November 2019, 03:17 PM | #90 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
5th November 2019, 03:18 PM | #91 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
*sigh* YOU. DO. NOT. UNDERSTAND. THIS. If a certain locus is investigated and the allele of a given individual is NOT present, then one can more-or-less rule out that individual as a contributor. Please, please, please, please, please...... try to read up and understand about DNA science and forensic DNA typing properly before writing any more. It's tiring having to correct and educate you so much. Thank you. |
5th November 2019, 03:20 PM | #92 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
What??? YOU said "sheet". Now you're saying "some similar type of fabric or cloth" (which, by the way, smells very much like backtracking bat guano). So where IS this "similar type of fabric or cloth", Vixen? What is/was its provenance? Where's the actual evidence of its existence and its use? |
5th November 2019, 03:21 PM | #93 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
She would have to share the same alleles to share the same number of peaks at each allele. She has taken you for a ride. I despise 'scientists' who use their professions and long list of qualifications to get clients off criminal charges by pretending false authority.
Vecchiotti's DNA would NOT have shown up on the PCR, least of all at nine loci. |
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
5th November 2019, 03:22 PM | #94 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
|
5th November 2019, 03:23 PM | #95 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
|
5th November 2019, 03:51 PM | #96 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,272
|
|
5th November 2019, 04:18 PM | #97 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Can you please try and respond to the actual topic instead of these ridiculous diversions? The topic was your claim that Vinci said Knox's DNA was on the bra hook. You have not, and cannot, quote Vinci saying so from the report you provided as 'proof'. Instead, I have quoted directly from it showing he clearly says the opposite. I'm having flashbacks to your denials that Knox was acquitted of the money/c card theft even though I provided the court documents clearly stating so.
If the evidence showed "very clearly Knox touched Meredith's bra clasp at some point", then why was this evidence never presented in court by the prosecution as part of their case? Face it, Vix. You are wrong about this. Just admit it and move on.
Quote:
Hmmmmmmm....you got the second part of that claim wrong:
Quote:
|
5th November 2019, 04:21 PM | #98 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
Wow, so you have Vecchiotti's DNA profile which you can produce here to prove she is lying? Or could this be just another one of your baseless claims pulled from your nether region?
Apparently you didn't understand the chart I posted, so let me refresh your memory; Using the values cited in the RTIGF there were NO ALLELES unique to Amanda. In other words, ALL alleles matched either Meredith's or Raffaele's profile. Using all peaks on the egram 50 RFU or above there are three alleles unique to Amanda. That yields a big fat ZERO on DNA probability. What's clear to me is you have NO comprehension of DNA analysis, you have NO idea of what the peak values were and you're making up conclusions that are not supported by the lab results. Stefanoni did NOT testify Amanda's profile was on the clasp. Vinci did NOT conclude in his report that Amanda's profile as on the clasp. Balding stated Amanda's profile is not on the clasp. In fact, here's an excerpt from an article on the subject, which quotes Balding.
Quote:
|
5th November 2019, 04:26 PM | #99 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 20,637
|
Vinci was actually (correctly) stating that the entire bra clasp's worth of DNA would be inadmissible in UK or US courts, owing to the combination of low-template quantities and the clear and obvious contamination issue (which also had the effect of creating so many peaks and stutters that it became exponentially more difficult to match any individual with any reasonable level of reliability). But the Italian courts (at that time, at least) seemingly looked at all this on an ad hoc basis, with no ground rules drawn up for what would and would not be admissible. And when you add into that the unlawful propensity for the lower courts to take the prosecution case as the default narrative - with the defence needing actively to disprove elements of the prosecution case before their (the defence's) view was taken into consideration - the bra clasp fiasco was (unfortunately and unjustly) a foregone conclusion in courts such as Massei's and Nencini's. But fortunately, Marasca's SC Panel (and Hellmann before that, let's not forget) was more scientifically objective, more enlightened, and more determined to actually follow Italian law...... |
5th November 2019, 04:31 PM | #100 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
If that is how you think it works, then you must also apply that philosophy to the prosecution experts. So, it follows that:
Rinaldi, Boemia, Norelli, Introna, et al were prosecution experts and handsomely paid to refute any evidence not supporting the prosecution. That is their job as prosecution witnesses. Have you ever stopped to consider how ridiculous it is to think that all these professionals are so corrupt that they'll lie under oath? That money is more important to them than losing their reputations and careers and quite possibly going to prison for perjury? |
5th November 2019, 05:02 PM | #101 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
LOL!
Cantwell was very open about her concerns over the case. She posted about it on her Congressional Website on Dec. 04, 2009, including that she was going to request Clinton look into it.
Quote:
From that you make the gigantic and ridiculous leap to Clinton pressuring Italy to clear Knox. Where is this alleged email from Clinton saying "she'll look into it", Vixen? I'd ask you to produce it, but why waste my time? We both know the outcome. This is the problem with so many PGP; they take a tidbit of info and twist it into anything they want without evidence. Intellectual dishonesty. |
5th November 2019, 05:07 PM | #102 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
It wasn't only not a sheet, it wasn't any kind of fabric or cloth at all. I suggest you take your own advice and read the court testimony of what the police and coroner found, Vix. They mention nothing of the sort. They describe a pillow under her hips and a duvet over her. No sheet or other cloth/fabric outside of clothing is included.
|
5th November 2019, 05:23 PM | #103 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
|
6th November 2019, 12:56 AM | #104 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
As you were told nine to ten alleles is not sufficient legal standard in Italy but would be in the UK or the USA.
Vinci did indeed say the DNA on the 'bra cloth with hook' was compatible with Knox - referring to the hook: Here is his conclusion on pages 11-12.
Quote:
English translation:
Quote:
No doubt you and London John will be coming along shortly to offer up an 'alternative universe' explanation for this. |
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
6th November 2019, 01:07 AM | #105 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
Stefanoni did not testify in court the nine to ten alleles of Knox on the bra clasp because being the conscientious strictly professional individual she is, she stuck to the accepted legal and scientific standards of evidence and gave the criminal court of law what a criminal court of law demanded: a high standard of proof near to 99.9% significance.
It proves conclusively she was not 'out to get Knox and Sollecito' and 'tampered with the evidence'. |
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
6th November 2019, 01:19 AM | #106 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
Rubbish: they were all members of staff and just earned their regular salary or consultant fees.
People like Gill and Douglas go into Defence forensics because they know that an individual accused of a serious crime that means a long time in prison or even the death penalty (which Knox , Guede and Sollecito would certainly have got in Washington state, or the alternative life-means-life in a hard tough penitentiary) will pay any amount of money to get off the rap. These privately hired defense scientists can earn an absolute fortune presenting their client as 'innocent' and with a view to getting some of the compensation money if their reputation - for which they are hired for and receive extortionate fees - manages to swing it and successfully plant the seed of doubt in the jury or court's mind. I don't know if you ever saw Wolf of Wall Street but there is a scene in which Di Caprio is lounging about in his luxury yacht when he is approached by the FBI guys who are on his tail. He throws dollar bills at them sneering that he is rolling in wealth whilst they are on bum FBI wages. You can be sure Bongionor, Dalla Vedova, Maori, Vecchiotti and Conti (I wonder how much they got paid to be in the Netflix movie?) were all in it for the money squeezing every last dollar and cent out of Knox and her chum. |
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
6th November 2019, 01:24 AM | #107 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
6th November 2019, 01:37 AM | #108 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
6th November 2019, 05:28 AM | #109 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,306
|
|
__________________
Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman |
|
6th November 2019, 06:38 AM | #110 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15,561
|
|
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else. |
|
6th November 2019, 09:36 AM | #111 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 298
|
Perhaps Vix would care to divulge exactly how she "knows" what they "earned".
I wonder if it ever occurred to Vix that "people like Gill & Dougas" have in all probability lent their expertise to, and testified for, prosecutors. Nah...probably not. No, most "individuals" won't do any such thing because most don't have the money with which to do so. I wonder if Vix is "in" whatever job it is that she currently manages to hold "for the money". As for anyone getting paid for appearing in the Netflix documentary (learn the difference, Vix), since Knox wasn't, I doubt if anyone else was. But if some knowledgeable, i.e., non-Vix, person knows better, please correct me. |
6th November 2019, 10:44 AM | #112 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
Geezus Vixen, how many times must this be repeated before it sinks in???
EVEN if we use ALL peaks 50 RFU and above, there are only 3 (as in THREE) alleles that are unique to Amanda. There are 10 alleles that Amanda and Meredith share, and since we know Meredith's DNA is on the clasp, those are alleles you can NOT attribute to Amanda. Three more are shared by Raffaele, three more shared with Guede. So that's six more you also can NOT attribute to Amanda. That leaves you with 3 (THREE). Three alleles out of 30 (THIRTY). Is this sinking in yet? Are you deliberately trying to make me throw up? "...being the conscientious strictly professional individual she is..."???? No Vixen, no one - including Stefanoni - attempted to suggest Amanda's DNA was on the clasp because it is all but definitively proven it is not. Why? Because aside from there being only 3 alleles unique to Amanda's profile detected, there are 11 that are missing. Do you understand the significance of this or does this too need to be spelled out for you? |
6th November 2019, 11:04 AM | #113 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
I asked for a citation, which once again, you have failed to produce that "nine to ten alleles is not sufficient legal standard in Italy but would be in the UK or the USA". Need I post again your own words regarding where the onus of proof lies, Vix? "As you have been told" does not meet even the minimum requirement of proof.
Correct! He said it was COMPATIBLE WITH SOME MARKERS...which does not mean it was Knox's DNA! This has been explained to you over and over again. Even that PGP favorite, Balding, has said his software shows it's not Knox's DNA on the clasp. Here is his conclusion on pages 11-12.
Quote:
Quote:
No doubt you and London John will be coming along shortly to offer up an 'alternative universe' explanation for this.[/quote] How conveniently you cherry pick what you think supports your case when, in reality, it does not. You ignore Vinci's ultimate conclusion:
Quote:
So tell me, Vix, exactly where does Vinci say that KNOX'S DNA IS ON THE BRA HOOK? HINT: He doesn't. Which. Is. Why. You. Cannot. Quote. Him. Saying. So. |
6th November 2019, 12:07 PM | #114 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
In other words, they got paid to testify for the prosecution just as the defense experts were paid to testify. Norelli, Introna, Liviero, Marchionni were not "on staff"; they were private consultants just as the defense experts were. You have no idea how much any of these experts were paid, defense or prosecution so your claim is completely unsupported.
The above is beyond ridiculous in so many ways. "Defence forensics"? LOL. Are forensics different for the defense than for the prosecution? Douglas? He isn't a forensic expert; he was an FBI profiler. Your entire paragraph is simply made up nonsense.
Quote:
Quote:
Do you have evidence that ANYONE was paid to appear in the documentary? No, of course you don't. Stop making crap up, Vixen. |
6th November 2019, 12:23 PM | #115 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,306
|
|
6th November 2019, 12:40 PM | #116 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
1. In what world has that been established, Vixen? No one testified there was a sheet under Kercher. NO ONE. Which is why you cannot produce it. ALL accounts state that Kercher lay under a duvet/quilt with a pillow beneath her hips. No mention of a sheet at all except the one on the bed. Why do you have such difficulty admitting you are just plain wrong?
2. Good lord. Can you produce this email? No. Can you provide evidence that Wikileaks released said email? No. Can you provide evidence of any email sent from Clinton to Cantwell? No. Can you provide evidence that the US State Dept. influenced, or attempted to influence, the outcome of any of the trials? No. For most people that would be enough to stop claiming otherwise. For most people. ETA: Even IF such an email exists, Clinton saying she'd 'look into it' is not evidence that Clinton or the State Dept. attempted to interfere in the trials in any way. |
6th November 2019, 01:15 PM | #117 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 32,926
|
Would you care to explain how this "strictly professional individual" could simply 'forget' to report several TMB negative tests on the luminol prints? Tests that were extremely important because they showed the prints were not in blood as the prosecution claimed? Prints that she repeatedly referred to as being 'luminol revealed" which, for many people, incorrectly means blood is present?
Would you care to explain why this "strictly professional individual" failed to change her gloves between handling pieces of evidence as the video proves? Would you care to explain why this "strictly professional individual" failed to collect the bra clasp on Nov 2 when it was originally found? Would you care to explain why this "strictly professional individual" failed to collect the bloody jacket the victim was wearing during the murder or her purse, socks and shoes on Nov. 2? |
6th November 2019, 01:18 PM | #118 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
6th November 2019, 02:02 PM | #119 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,607
|
Vixen, I'm confused. Stacy asked you; "Where is this alleged email from Clinton saying "she'll look into it", Vixen?" The email you've linked to is in reference to HarperCollins getting the rights to Amanda's memoir. It has nothing to do with Clinton saying she'd look into it. What am I missing?
|
6th November 2019, 02:35 PM | #120 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
|
|
__________________
who claims the soulless Who speaks for the forgotten dead ~ Danzig |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|