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 !MOD BOX WARNING! , Amanda Knox , Italy cases , Meredith Kercher , murder cases , Raffaele Sollecito

Reply
Old 10th October 2019, 03:57 AM   #3201
Wilson85
Student
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
To quote your hero: 'VERY SAD! Cofveve'
You are the one who believes she is a super-hero that got away with murder,
- able to clean her and Sollecitos DNA and leave Guedes
- able to rig the highest courts in Italy and Europe
- able to convince scientists and media of her case

We think she is just a normal, innocent person that was wrongfully convicted.
Wilson85 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 October 2019, 04:29 AM   #3202
Disbelief
Master Poster
 
Disbelief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,643
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
To quote your hero: 'VERY SAD! Cofveve'
It's Covfefe, by the way. I'm sure you'll go on for pages telling me I'm wrong, but here you go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covfefe
__________________
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
Disbelief 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 October 2019, 07:33 AM   #3203
whoanellie
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 511
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I remember her claiming that! Hysterical!
Examples of her great and unmatched wisdom.
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 10th October 2019, 11:19 AM   #3204
NotEvenWrong
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 855
Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
This is rich coming from someone who has posted here that DNA is a protein and that cells are extracted from their nuclei. If any one wants the links I can provide them.
Did Vixen and her chums actually try to argue DNA is a protein and cells are extracted from their nuclei? This can't be real.
NotEvenWrong 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 October 2019, 11:29 AM   #3205
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 16,761
Originally Posted by NotEvenWrong View Post
Did Vixen and her chums actually try to argue DNA is a protein and cells are extracted from their nuclei? This can't be real.
No, it was clumsy wording. I was trying to convey that DNA is found in protein (referring to bodily fluids, such as greasy sweat from sebaceous glands). It gave people a chance to twist my words rather than address the issue of how Raff's DNA came to be on the bra-clasp.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
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 10th October 2019, 12:05 PM   #3206
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,293
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, it was clumsy wording. I was trying to convey that DNA is found in protein (referring to bodily fluids, such as greasy sweat from sebaceous glands). It gave people a chance to twist my words rather than address the issue of how Raff's DNA came to be on the bra-clasp.
...... as well as two or three other male haplotypes which one convicting judge said came from the victim's girlfriends.

How on earth did all this get on to the single hook on the clasp, not the clasp itself?





Could it have been the owner of these obviously dirty forensic gloves?
__________________
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 October 2019, 12:06 PM   #3207
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,020
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, it was clumsy wording. I was trying to convey that DNA is found in protein (referring to bodily fluids, such as greasy sweat from sebaceous glands). It gave people a chance to twist my words rather than address the issue of how Raff's DNA came to be on the bra-clasp.
Sure; it was 'clumsy wording'. Uh huh. Just how did the DNA of at least 2 other men and he DNA of other women come to be on that bra clasp, Vix? Did they all touch that clasp? Just how many people were touching that clasp and why?
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 October 2019, 12:08 PM   #3208
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,293
Originally Posted by NotEvenWrong View Post
Did Vixen and her chums actually try to argue DNA is a protein and cells are extracted from their nuclei? This can't be real.
When I was three I lied to my mom. She asked me if I'd taken a cookie. I said I had not.

When she showed me the video of me stealing the cookie, I told her my lie had been, "clumsy wording."

My mom said, "I guess it was!"
__________________
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 October 2019, 12:19 PM   #3209
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: A pocket paradise between the sewage treatment plant and the railroad
Posts: 15,447
Originally Posted by Bill Williams View Post
When I was three I lied to my mom. She asked me if I'd taken a cookie. I said I had not.

When she showed me the video of me stealing the cookie, I told her my lie had been, "clumsy wording."

When I was three, my reaction to being shown such a video would have been, "Wow, where did my parents suddenly get the tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment needed to record their own TV show?"

I guess I'm a bit older than you...
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad 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 October 2019, 12:23 PM   #3210
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,293
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
When I was three, my reaction to being shown such a video would have been, "Wow, where did my parents suddenly get the tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment needed to record their own TV show?"

I guess I'm a bit older than you...
Both parents were high value CIA assets, with connections to high tech stuff no one talked about.

(When this claim that my parents were in the CIA is proved wrong, I'll just claim it had been "clumsy wording".)
__________________
In a thread titled "Who Killed Meredith Kercher?", the answer is obvious. Rudy Guede and no one else.

Last edited by Bill Williams; 10th October 2019 at 12:27 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 October 2019, 01:12 PM   #3211
whoanellie
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 511
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, it was clumsy wording. I was trying to convey that DNA is found in protein (referring to bodily fluids, such as greasy sweat from sebaceous glands). It gave people a chance to twist my words rather than address the issue of how Raff's DNA came to be on the bra-clasp.
This vixplanation doesn't help your case.
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 10th October 2019, 02:18 PM   #3212
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,073
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, it was clumsy wording. I was trying to convey that DNA is found in protein (referring to bodily fluids, such as greasy sweat from sebaceous glands). It gave people a chance to twist my words rather than address the issue of how Raff's DNA came to be on the bra-clasp.


Hahaha doubling down on another fail, I see! "Vixplanation" LOLOLOL

You really know nothing WHATSOEVER about this subject (or, for that matter, about almost all science, apparently). DNA is not "found in protein", Vixen. DNA provides the instructions for assembling proteins, Vixen. And DNA ultimately provides the instructions for how proteins and other molecules are assembled into different cells of the body, Vixen. And each of those cells (apart from red blood cells and those of sperm and eggs) also contains a full copy of the entity's DNA within its nucleus, Vixen.

Nobody "twisted (your) words", Vixen. But hilariously, in trying to invent a "Vixplanation" for how your words were twisted, you only succeeded in doubling down on a demonstration of your own ignorance. Classic times, indeed


ETA: Oh, and given that the DNA of at least two different other men (who remain unidentified, who were not Guede, who were not Kercher's boyfriend, and who (obviously) did not live in the girls' cottage) were also found on that single tiny metal hook via (equally obviously) secondary- or tertiary-transfer contamination, it must necessarily be held that the DNA of Sollecito - which was also found at LCN levels on that tiny hook - cannot be considered in any way as reliable evidence that Sollecito ever came into direct contact with that tiny bra hook. Does that answer your question?

Last edited by LondonJohn; 10th October 2019 at 03:09 PM.
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 10th October 2019, 02:20 PM   #3213
whoanellie
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 511
Vixen on biochemistry:
"Likewise, DNA, being a protein, doesn't usually stick unless there are moist or oily conditions, such as saliva, perspiration, moist skin cells, blood and other bodily fluids."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post11175075
Vixen on cell biology:
"She extracted the cell from its nucleus"
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11418330
Vixen on classical mechanics:
"If thrown from outside, the impact on the window/shutter (assuming it can get through the gap of the outter shutters, which Massei accept it could not have) would be weight of the object times distance travelled, which is say, 10lb x six feet (72")= 720lbs (kinetic energy) divided by the distance it comes to a halt."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post11614727
Vixen on dimensional analysis:
"In a foot system, it is OK to convert into inches, as the distance at 'stop' level is often a small fraction of the distance travelled, hence it makes sense to convert 6 feet into 72 inches, if the stop distance is a fraction of an inch. (This is just a nicetie, and of course, not mandatory.) the weight of the rock was expressed in lbs for similar reason."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post11615129
Vixen on IT
"I am sure a first year IT student would have no problem unscrewing the back and taking out the motherboard and frying the disk."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post12020274
Vixen:
“I am a mathematician and a scientist.”
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11651593
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 10th October 2019, 03:02 PM   #3214
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,073
Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
Vixen on biochemistry:
"Likewise, DNA, being a protein, doesn't usually stick unless there are moist or oily conditions, such as saliva, perspiration, moist skin cells, blood and other bodily fluids."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post11175075
Vixen on cell biology:
"She extracted the cell from its nucleus"
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11418330
Vixen on classical mechanics:
"If thrown from outside, the impact on the window/shutter (assuming it can get through the gap of the outter shutters, which Massei accept it could not have) would be weight of the object times distance travelled, which is say, 10lb x six feet (72")= 720lbs (kinetic energy) divided by the distance it comes to a halt."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post11614727
Vixen on dimensional analysis:
"In a foot system, it is OK to convert into inches, as the distance at 'stop' level is often a small fraction of the distance travelled, hence it makes sense to convert 6 feet into 72 inches, if the stop distance is a fraction of an inch. (This is just a nicetie, and of course, not mandatory.) the weight of the rock was expressed in lbs for similar reason."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post11615129
Vixen on IT
"I am sure a first year IT student would have no problem unscrewing the back and taking out the motherboard and frying the disk."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post12020274
Vixen:
“I am a mathematician and a scientist.”
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11651593




Vixen's latest double-down double-fail on DNA and protein is, in a very real sense, akin to someone writing something like this:

"When I wrote that the Green Bay Packers is a famous basketball team, that was just clumsy wording. I was trying to convey that a famous basketball team is found within the Green Bay Packers."
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 10th October 2019, 03:04 PM   #3215
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,957
Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
Vixen on biochemistry:
"Likewise, DNA, being a protein, doesn't usually stick unless there are moist or oily conditions, such as saliva, perspiration, moist skin cells, blood and other bodily fluids."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post11175075
Vixen on cell biology:
"She extracted the cell from its nucleus"
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11418330
Vixen on classical mechanics:
"If thrown from outside, the impact on the window/shutter (assuming it can get through the gap of the outter shutters, which Massei accept it could not have) would be weight of the object times distance travelled, which is say, 10lb x six feet (72")= 720lbs (kinetic energy) divided by the distance it comes to a halt."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post11614727
Vixen on dimensional analysis:
"In a foot system, it is OK to convert into inches, as the distance at 'stop' level is often a small fraction of the distance travelled, hence it makes sense to convert 6 feet into 72 inches, if the stop distance is a fraction of an inch. (This is just a nicetie, and of course, not mandatory.) the weight of the rock was expressed in lbs for similar reason."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post11615129
Vixen on IT
"I am sure a first year IT student would have no problem unscrewing the back and taking out the motherboard and frying the disk."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post12020274
Vixen:
“I am a mathematician and a scientist.”
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11651593
whoanellie, thanks for posting these entertaining highlights.

There is a great depth of humorous nonsense in Vixen's posts on the science relevant to this case.
Numbers is online now   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 October 2019, 03:56 PM   #3216
Welshman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 718
Originally Posted by NotEvenWrong View Post
Did Vixen and her chums actually try to argue DNA is a protein and cells are extracted from their nuclei? This can't be real.
We have seen quite a few LOL gems from Vixen. An example is that Rudy had raped Meredith which was proved by Rudy's DNA in Meredith's vagina. Vixen argued that Amanda and Raffaele felt it necessary to return to the cottage to stage a rape despite the fact Rudy had already raped Meredith.
Welshman 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 October 2019, 06:34 PM   #3217
whoanellie
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 511
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, it was clumsy wording. I was trying to convey that DNA is found in protein (referring to bodily fluids, such as greasy sweat from sebaceous glands). It gave people a chance to twist my words rather than address the issue of how Raff's DNA came to be on the bra-clasp.
FYI Vixen, DNA is not "found in protein". "protein" does not mean "bodily fluids". Sebaceous glands produce sebum which it seems is made up of triglycerides, free fatty acids, wax esters, squalene, cholesterol esters, and cholesterol. All of those are lipids and none of them are either DNA or protein. This is not a matter of clumsy wording. This is a matter of you being way, way out of your depth. kemo sabe?
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 10th October 2019, 06:35 PM   #3218
whoanellie
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 511
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
whoanellie, thanks for posting these entertaining highlights.

There is a great depth of humorous nonsense in Vixen's posts on the science relevant to this case.
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 10th October 2019, 06:51 PM   #3219
NotEvenWrong
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 855
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
No, it was clumsy wording. I was trying to convey that DNA is found in protein (referring to bodily fluids, such as greasy sweat from sebaceous glands). It gave people a chance to twist my words rather than address the issue of how Raff's DNA came to be on the bra-clasp.
Vixen,
Now now. This is the internet and there is a record of the things you write. whoanellie generously provided a link to your original statement:

"Likewise, DNA, being a protein, doesn't usually stick unless there are moist or oily conditions, such as saliva, perspiration, moist skin cells, blood and other bodily fluids."

So this is like wrong in every way possible. If you extract DNA from a large enough mass of cells and precipitate it, it literally looks and has the texture of snot. It sticks to everything. That's why there are such rigorous cleaning and decontamination procedures in molecular biology labs. One tiny sub-nanogram of DNA can and will stick to everything and act as a template for all these forensic tests. That's why there are multiple contributors on Meredith's clasp -- it was contaminated because it wasn't handled right.

And as others have said, even in your "corrected" statement DNA is not found in protein. It provides the template to encode RNA --> protein. So uh wtf are you talking about.

I don't understand why you would lie about your original statement regarding DNA given that there is a record on here of your exact words, and we've determined you aren't a pathological liar. Since you aren't a pathological liar, then why are you pathologically lying? Isn't that she-devil Amanda Knox the pathological liar, as you claim? Or is it someone else.......?
NotEvenWrong 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 October 2019, 08:18 PM   #3220
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,293
Originally Posted by NotEvenWrong View Post
I don't understand why you would lie about your original statement regarding DNA given that there is a record on here of your exact words, and we've determined you aren't a pathological liar. Since you aren't a pathological liar, then why are you pathologically lying? Isn't that she-devil Amanda Knox the pathological liar, as you claim? Or is it someone else.......?
It is controversial among psychologists if there is a distinction to be made between compulsive and pathological lying. The former tends to be lying out of habit, and the latter tends to be lying to create a narrative of self aggrandizement.

This thread is far from being a clinical setting, and a licensed professional would not attempt such a diagnosis unless they'd studied someone in such a controlled, extended situation.

Be that as it is, it **is** strange that someone would (as you imply) **record** their ignorance, and then double down on claims that they'd never said such things, or claim it had been "clumsy wording".

The best thing, IMO? Such lunacy completely destroys the usefulness of this thread. I say that meaning that it is a good thing to be destroyed.

I'm not sure what it says about those of us who remain, but who in their right mind, me included, would participate in this lunacy?
__________________
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 October 2019, 12:50 AM   #3221
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 16,761
Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
FYI Vixen, DNA is not "found in protein". "protein" does not mean "bodily fluids". Sebaceous glands produce sebum which it seems is made up of triglycerides, free fatty acids, wax esters, squalene, cholesterol esters, and cholesterol. All of those are lipids and none of them are either DNA or protein. This is not a matter of clumsy wording. This is a matter of you being way, way out of your depth. kemo sabe?
You are wrong. The only time the skin produces good quality DNA samples (as opposed to normal every day flaking) is when:
  • the skin is vigorously rubbed or flaked
  • it is obtained near a sebacceous gland (where your hair roots are) because your hair follicles contain DNA and the greasy sweat makes it 'stickable' onto surfaces

This is why the courts deemed:
  • Amanda Knox either rubbed her hands together, to produce such a copious amount of her DNA in the sink, mixed in with Meredith's blood
  • the evidence shows she was actually bleeding herself - from various blood stains in the bathroom - DNA is only found in nucleated cells and only white blood cells have nucleii. Thus, for her DNA to have been even MORE COPIOUS than Mez' she was almost certainly bleeding at the same time, for hers to be dominant over a profusely bleeding murder victim's.
  • Sollecito must have pressed his fingers firmly on the bra clasp hook for it to have shown such a high profile DNA sample. There were fragments of 6-8 allele of another two males, which can safely be dismissed as background contamination (for example, from dust).

Now, as the skin doesn't really yield much DNA (see above) I would hypothesise that Raff may have wiped his brow hence transferring a strong DNA onto his hand. In moments of intense fear or danger (and carrying out a wicked murder would create such an involuntary physical reaction - perspiring is not something you can control) sweat is likely to be pouring down your forehead and temples - whilst your chest, back and underarms are likely covered by clothing - which is so irritating, Raff likely automatically wiped his brow without even thinking. Hence, his extremely strong DNA profile on the bra clasp as it was bent during the attack which certainly is not LCN.

Hello? Smell the coffee.

His footprint also appears on the bathmat.

Do wake up.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'

Last edited by Vixen; 11th October 2019 at 12:54 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 October 2019, 01:01 AM   #3222
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,020
Bill, I don't know about you, but I remain due to this thread's pure entertainment value. It never fails to make me laugh.
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 October 2019, 01:27 AM   #3223
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 16,761
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Bill, I don't know about you, but I remain due to this thread's pure entertainment value. It never fails to make me laugh.
That's what trolls live for. A good laugh and a rise.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
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 October 2019, 01:35 AM   #3224
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,898
We must all defer to your superior knowledge of the troll mentality.
Matthew Best 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 October 2019, 01:35 AM   #3225
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,020
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
That's what trolls live for. A good laugh and a rise.
Trolls often provide a good laugh with their outrageous behavior. For example, claiming a 9 lb 'boulder' can't be thrown 6 feet directly across through a window by an athletic young man, that Knox flew home on a private jet, that the theft charges of the wallet from Kercher's purse were 'dropped', that Knox was 'bleeding profusely", etc.

Thanks for the memories!
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 October 2019, 04:14 AM   #3226
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,293
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
This is why the courts deemed:
  • Amanda Knox either rubbed her hands together, to produce such a copious amount of her DNA in the sink, mixed in with Meredith's blood
  • the evidence shows she was actually bleeding herself - from various blood stains in the bathroom - DNA is only found in nucleated cells and only white blood cells have nucleii. Thus, for her DNA to have been even MORE COPIOUS than Mez' she was almost certainly bleeding at the same time, for hers to be dominant over a profusely bleeding murder victim's.
Ah, er, no - this is not what the evidence shows. This is what an anonymous guilter-nutter has been posting for years.

The original convicting court advanced this as a theory, conceding at the time that the hard evidence actually **didn't** show this..... but "deduced" it as factual on other grounds. Fast forward to 2015 when the Italian Supreme Court itself mentioned this factoid, saying that its proof was "elegant", then did not provide or even cite the alleged proof.

It's when one goes on their own search for this "elegant proof" that one discovers that even the court advancing the factoid admitted there wasn't one!

Yet here you are all these years later cut and pasting from Harry Rag, who still bangs on about "mixed blood", albeit now through the back door.

And remember, the end point of your rationale is that the reason why this factoid never convicted anyone is that the Mafia, Masons, and powerful American media interests conspired to rig Italy's courts.

So, you're diverting from claiming DNA was a protein by recycling Harry Rag's tripe. Good strategy. Except you forget, again, that this thread keeps a permanent record of your gaffes and avoidences.
__________________
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 October 2019, 04:34 AM   #3227
whoanellie
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 511
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You are wrong.
.
.
.
.

Do wake up.
Good morning Vixen. I did just wake up. You quote a post of mine, state that I am wrong, and then produce a screed that has nothing to do with my post. What is it that you contend I was wrong about? I understand your desire to change the subject but I am not playing.
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 11th October 2019, 06:49 AM   #3228
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,073
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You are wrong. The only time the skin produces good quality DNA samples (as opposed to normal every day flaking) is when:
  • the skin is vigorously rubbed or flaked
  • it is obtained near a sebacceous gland (where your hair roots are) because your hair follicles contain DNA and the greasy sweat makes it 'stickable' onto surfaces


Oh my my my. This just gets more and more embarrassing. In yet another double-down, you've further illustrated your utter ignorance of cellular biology.

You appear to believe that DNA sort of floats around freely in the human body. As evidenced by your fatuous belief that "greasy sweat makes it (i.e. DNA) 'stickable' onto surfaces".

As you've now been told several times by people who actually understand this subject..... DNA is bound within the nuclei of cells. Unless the cell is broken apart in a denaturing process, the DNA remains bound within the nucleus. It is not floating around ready to be "stickable" onto surfaces.

See, Vixen, when DNA analysis is conducted, the first step in the process is the denaturing of the cells present, in order to allow the DNA to separate out. Up until that happens, the DNA is just one constituent part of the nucleus, which in turn is just one constituent part of the cell. It's cells that get transferred. The DNA gets transferred only by virtue of it being present within the nuclei which are within the cells which get transferred.

Please, please stop pretending you understand this - until, that is, you actually do. And similarly, please stop attempting to wriggle out of one hole of ignorance by digging an even bigger hole of ignorance. Thank you in advance.




Quote:
This is why the courts deemed:
  • Amanda Knox either rubbed her hands together, to produce such a copious amount of her DNA in the sink, mixed in with Meredith's blood
  • the evidence shows she was actually bleeding herself - from various blood stains in the bathroom - DNA is only found in nucleated cells and only white blood cells have nucleii. Thus, for her DNA to have been even MORE COPIOUS than Mez' she was almost certainly bleeding at the same time, for hers to be dominant over a profusely bleeding murder victim's.
  • Sollecito must have pressed his fingers firmly on the bra clasp hook for it to have shown such a high profile DNA sample. There were fragments of 6-8 allele of another two males, which can safely be dismissed as background contamination (for example, from dust).

Now, as the skin doesn't really yield much DNA (see above) I would hypothesise that Raff may have wiped his brow hence transferring a strong DNA onto his hand. In moments of intense fear or danger (and carrying out a wicked murder would create such an involuntary physical reaction - perspiring is not something you can control) sweat is likely to be pouring down your forehead and temples - whilst your chest, back and underarms are likely covered by clothing - which is so irritating, Raff likely automatically wiped his brow without even thinking. Hence, his extremely strong DNA profile on the bra clasp as it was bent during the attack which certainly is not LCN.

Hello? Smell the coffee.

His footprint also appears on the bathmat.

Do wake up.


See, I can stop you as soon as your first six words of this whole passage:

"This is why the courts deemed......"

Because everything written after that is, in a very real sense (both judicially and ethically) worthless, Vixen. Because, you see, what the lower courts "deemed" is literally worth absolutely nothing whatsoever. Do you know why that is so, Vixen? I mean, you really ought to know by now why it is so, but just for the avoidance of doubt, it would be great if you were to explain it. Again, thanks in advance.

Never were your final three words more ironic.
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 October 2019, 06:56 AM   #3229
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,314
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You are wrong. The only time the skin produces good quality DNA samples (as opposed to normal every day flaking) is when:
  • the skin is vigorously rubbed or flaked
  • it is obtained near a sebacceous gland (where your hair roots are) because your hair follicles contain DNA and the greasy sweat makes it 'stickable' onto surfaces
And on what basis would one conclude Amanda's DNA came from her skin?
Quote:
This is why the courts deemed:
  • Amanda Knox either rubbed her hands together, to produce such a copious amount of her DNA in the sink, mixed in with Meredith's blood
  • the evidence shows she was actually bleeding herself - from various blood stains in the bathroom - DNA is only found in nucleated cells and only white blood cells have nucleii. Thus, for her DNA to have been even MORE COPIOUS than Mez' she was almost certainly bleeding at the same time, for hers to be dominant over a profusely bleeding murder victim's.
The profusely bleeding Meredith lay dying in her bedroom, not the bathroom. What the evidence shows is the blood being collected is extremely diluted. So we can assume someone was either rinsing themselves off or perhaps the knife, and in the process they splatter blood laced water drops. This results in far lower RFU values than pure blood drops.

And while I am at it, this was a bathroom, and Amanda does brush her teeth there. I'm assuming you realize many other bodily fluids produce DNA other than blood or rubbed/sweaty skin. In fact saliva is a great source of DNA. And what do we do when we brush our teeth? ...we spit saliva. So it is a logic theory to conclude what was collected was traces of Amanda's saliva along with some diluted blood from Meredith. This would be entirely consistent with the lab results.

Quote:
  • Sollecito must have pressed his fingers firmly on the bra clasp hook for it to have shown such a high profile DNA sample. There were fragments of 6-8 allele of another two males, which can safely be dismissed as background contamination (for example, from dust).

Now, as the skin doesn't really yield much DNA (see above) I would hypothesise that Raff may have wiped his brow hence transferring a strong DNA onto his hand.
So I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you've never read anything about secondary and tertiary transfer experiments which prove the mere act of picking up an object can result in enough DNA transfer to result in secondary transfer to the next person picking the object up?

What was the source of Meredith's DNA on the clasp which was 6x that of Raffaele's? Did she bleed on it? Or maybe her's was direct transfer from her fingers when putting it on and Raffaele's was secondary or tertiary transfer, thus yielding such a weak, LCN profile.
Quote:
In moments of intense fear or danger (and carrying out a wicked murder would create such an involuntary physical reaction - perspiring is not something you can control) sweat is likely to be pouring down your forehead and temples - whilst your chest, back and underarms are likely covered by clothing - which is so irritating, Raff likely automatically wiped his brow without even thinking. Hence, his extremely strong DNA profile on the bra clasp as it was bent during the attack which certainly is not LCN.

Hello? Smell the coffee.

His footprint also appears on the bathmat.
According to Vinci the print was compatible with Guede, incompatible with Raffaele, but I guess I understand why you like to pretend that analysis exists.
Quote:
Do wake up.
TruthCalls 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 October 2019, 07:06 AM   #3230
TomG
Thinker
 
TomG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 157
I've been catching up on a few books that I shamefully should have read long before now. One of them is "Three false convictions many lessons" by David C. Anderson and Nigel P. Scott, that deals with "The psychopathology of unjust prosecutions". It deals with the Kercher, Kiszko and Darlie Routier cases and explores the psychopathic/sociopathic mindset of the prosecution and police in contriving their convictions, and why "conditional negative empathy" types gravitate towards these professions.

I'm apparently the only one posting here that thinks that Mignini knew that Rudy was involved with Meredith's murder from day one and deliberately contrived the case against K&S; however, the book refers to psychological traits that are charcterised by conditional negative empathy that could quite easily accommodate the likes of Mignini, Comodi and others involved in the case, resulting in the deliberate framing of K&S. No-one posting here (except perhaps one) comes close to having conditional negative empathy which is perhaps why it's more difficult to comprehend that these individual certainly do exist in our society in very high places. Anyway, it's food for thought if you want to give it a read.

Hoots
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else.
TomG 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 October 2019, 07:39 AM   #3231
Numbers
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,957
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
.... DNA is bound within the nuclei of cells. Unless the cell is broken apart in a denaturing process, the DNA remains bound within the nucleus. It is not floating around ready to be "stickable" onto surfaces.

...when DNA analysis is conducted, the first step in the process is the denaturing of the cells present, in order to allow the DNA to separate out. Up until that happens, the DNA is just one constituent part of the nucleus, which in turn is just one constituent part of the cell. It's cells that get transferred. The DNA gets transferred only by virtue of it being present within the nuclei which are within the cells which get transferred.
....
1. LondonJohn, your post is almost entirely correct, but incomplete in neglecting to mention that there is a specific DNA (different from nuclear DNA) within the mitrochondria (the energy organelles, outside the nucleus but contained within their own membranes within the cell cytoplasm). Of course, mitrochondrial DNA was not analyzed by Stefanoni's scientific police lab (they most likely would not have had the necessary technology) and thus is not relevant in this case. In this case, the DNA analyzed, using STR technology, was indeed the DNA within the nucleus, which is separated from the rest of the cell by the nuclear membrane.

2. While some contents of the cells are denatured during the preparation for the DNA test, a better description of the initial action of preparation is that the cells are disrupted - cell and nuclear membranes are broken apart to free the nuclear DNA for the STR analysis.

3. In is indeed cells that are transferred, rather than exposed DNA, in crime scenes and in daily life. In DNA forensic laboratory settings, such as Stefanoni's scientific police lab, "naked" DNA itself may be transferred in contamination incidents.

Last edited by Numbers; 11th October 2019 at 07:42 AM.
Numbers is online now   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 October 2019, 08:22 AM   #3232
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,020
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
You are wrong. The only time the skin produces good quality DNA samples (as opposed to normal every day flaking) is when:
  • the skin is vigorously rubbed or flaked
  • it is obtained near a sebacceous gland (where your hair roots are) because your hair follicles contain DNA and the greasy sweat makes it 'stickable' onto surfaces
Oh, dear. Such ignorance. One does NOT have to rub vigorously to transfer skin cells. It's called touch transfer for a reason.

Quote:
...the simple act of picking up an object or touching a surface can lead to the identification and apprehension of a criminal. In the world of the forensic DNA analyst, the analysis of “touch” DNA samples is no longer the exception to the rule, it is the norm.
http://ryanforensicdna.com/touchdna/
According to you, someone would have to vigorously rub a coffee cup or a light switch to transfer their cells.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
This is why the courts deemed:
  • Amanda Knox either rubbed her hands together, to produce such a copious amount of her DNA in the sink, mixed in with Meredith's blood
  • the evidence shows she was actually bleeding herself - from various blood stains in the bathroom - DNA is only found in nucleated cells and only white blood cells have nucleii. Thus, for her DNA to have been even MORE COPIOUS than Mez' she was almost certainly bleeding at the same time, for hers to be dominant over a profusely bleeding murder victim's.
  • Knox's blood was found in one place, and one place only, in the house: on the bathroom faucet. There was no "in various places". Stop lying. Would you care to explain just why Knox would point out her own blood to the police instead of cleaning it up? If she'd been "bleeding profusely" as you keep falsely claiming, she'd have cleaned up all the blood she could see in that bathroom. Logic, Vix, logic.

    Once again, when you resort to "almost certainly", it means you have no evidence so you just make crap up.


    Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
  • Sollecito must have pressed his fingers firmly on the bra clasp hook for it to have shown such a high profile DNA sample. There were fragments of 6-8 allele of another two males, which can safely be dismissed as background contamination (for example, from dust).
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Now, as the skin doesn't really yield much DNA (see above) I would hypothesise that Raff may have wiped his brow hence transferring a strong DNA onto his hand. In moments of intense fear or danger (and carrying out a wicked murder would create such an involuntary physical reaction - perspiring is not something you can control) sweat is likely to be pouring down your forehead and temples - whilst your chest, back and underarms are likely covered by clothing - which is so irritating, Raff likely automatically wiped his brow without even thinking. Hence, his extremely strong DNA profile on the bra clasp as it was bent during the attack which certainly is not LCN.
Please try and stick to the evidence and retire your vivid imagination.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Hello? Smell the coffee.
That ain't coffee we're smelling.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
His footprint also appears on the bathmat.

Do wake up.
Not according to the Supreme Court, it ain't.
Do stop living in 2009.
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 October 2019, 01:32 PM   #3233
TomG
Thinker
 
TomG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 157
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Sollecito must have pressed his fingers firmly on the bra clasp hook for it to have shown such a high profile DNA sample. There were fragments of 6-8 allele of another two males, which can safely be dismissed as background contamination (for example, from dust).
.
It's always confused me as to why at least 3 male profiles were found on the bra-clasp and nowhere else at the crime scene. It seems that if the traces were NOT due to contamination there would have to be at least 3 different male assailants attacking Meredith with the sole interest of seizing the bra-clasp and having no interest or interaction with anything else in the room. Why didn't these 3 anonymous assailants not just ask Meredith for her bra-clasp and spare the poor girls life since that it seems was all they were interested in? Once the 3 anonymous assailants did get the clasp, what did they do with it except leave their traces all over it? Did they perform a little ritual before burying the bra-clasp under the rug in Meredith's room? OMG! it's got to be the masons! Hey, I've an idea! Why don't we ask Naseer (The man from Atlan) to ask the now archived Gabriella Carlizzi who can then contact Meredith who can.....Nah! I've got a better idea, it's CONTAMINATION right?

Hoots
__________________
The pro-guilt psychology is that if you can't nail K&S with evidence, don't presume innocence, try something else.
TomG 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 October 2019, 11:43 PM   #3234
bagels
Master Poster
 
bagels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,169
Corroboration is the basis for proving a criminal case, and this case has none. Evidence isn't left by fairies to help the police, it's the result of an actual event that actually occurred. This leaves corroborating webs connecting the evidence together.

So you have the following pieces of evidence:

1. Rudy Guede's criminal history of trespassing and break-ins
2. A figure consistent with Rudy Guede seen approaching the empty cottage alone on CCTV
3. An apparent break-in at the cottage
4. Rudy Guede's shoeprints at the cottage
5. Rudy's complete lack of a plausible reason for being at the cottage

Notice that all 5 pieces of evidence here are themselves connected in a web of corroboration, because they are impressions of an event that actually occurred and themselves form a picture of what actually happened.

Forensically destroyed bra clasps and blood negative dna negative luminol stains and random blood on sinks floating around in the ether untethered to anything is exactly what we would expect if the prosecution was just desperately trying to construct evidence and a case from nothing but noise and biased contrived sampling. Where are Amanda's wounds she bled from? Where's the sign of the cleanup that created the luminol stains? Why was she spotted by an eyewitness comfortably settled in to her boyfriends apartment mere minutes before the crime occurred? Etc. Being a delusional guilter prevents you from spotting that none of the evidence is connected. It's sad for them and I thank the goddesses by their Divine Grace that I wasn't cursed with a simple mind.
bagels 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 13th October 2019, 03:27 AM   #3235
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 16,761
Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
Vixen on biochemistry:
"Likewise, DNA, being a protein, doesn't usually stick unless there are moist or oily conditions, such as saliva, perspiration, moist skin cells, blood and other bodily fluids."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5#post11175075
Vixen on cell biology:
"She extracted the cell from its nucleus"
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11418330
Vixen on classical mechanics:
"If thrown from outside, the impact on the window/shutter (assuming it can get through the gap of the outter shutters, which Massei accept it could not have) would be weight of the object times distance travelled, which is say, 10lb x six feet (72")= 720lbs (kinetic energy) divided by the distance it comes to a halt."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post11614727
Vixen on dimensional analysis:
"In a foot system, it is OK to convert into inches, as the distance at 'stop' level is often a small fraction of the distance travelled, hence it makes sense to convert 6 feet into 72 inches, if the stop distance is a fraction of an inch. (This is just a nicetie, and of course, not mandatory.) the weight of the rock was expressed in lbs for similar reason."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post11615129
Vixen on IT
"I am sure a first year IT student would have no problem unscrewing the back and taking out the motherboard and frying the disk."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post12020274
Vixen:
“I am a mathematician and a scientist.”
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3#post11651593
If it is incorrect that weight x velocity equals distance travelled of a thrown inanimate obiect, how come when I was watching the mm-world championship athletics t'other day a narrrative came up on my screen displaying at what velocity each javelin thrower threw his javelin as it lauched in the air? Surely there must be a link for the highest speed at release were also the ones that seemed to travel the furthest. (134 mpk iirc.)
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
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 13th October 2019, 03:34 AM   #3236
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 16,761
Originally Posted by TomG View Post
It's always confused me as to why at least 3 male profiles were found on the bra-clasp and nowhere else at the crime scene. It seems that if the traces were NOT due to contamination there would have to be at least 3 different male assailants attacking Meredith with the sole interest of seizing the bra-clasp and having no interest or interaction with anything else in the room. Why didn't these 3 anonymous assailants not just ask Meredith for her bra-clasp and spare the poor girls life since that it seems was all they were interested in? Once the 3 anonymous assailants did get the clasp, what did they do with it except leave their traces all over it? Did they perform a little ritual before burying the bra-clasp under the rug in Meredith's room? OMG! it's got to be the masons! Hey, I've an idea! Why don't we ask Naseer (The man from Atlan) to ask the now archived Gabriella Carlizzi who can then contact Meredith who can.....Nah! I've got a better idea, it's CONTAMINATION right?

Hoots
FYI The bra clasp was originally found UNDER the body which was UNDER a duvet UNDER scattered bits of paper that the 'interrupted burglar' was scattering during his burglary BEFORE being 'interrupted' by Mez.

How did Raff's DNA get to there from the door?

Go figure.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
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 13th October 2019, 03:36 AM   #3237
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Suomi
Posts: 16,761
Originally Posted by bagels View Post
Corroboration is the basis for proving a criminal case, and this case has none. Evidence isn't left by fairies to help the police, it's the result of an actual event that actually occurred. This leaves corroborating webs connecting the evidence together.

So you have the following pieces of evidence:

1. Rudy Guede's criminal history of trespassing and break-ins
2. A figure consistent with Rudy Guede seen approaching the empty cottage alone on CCTV
3. An apparent break-in at the cottage
4. Rudy Guede's shoeprints at the cottage
5. Rudy's complete lack of a plausible reason for being at the cottage

Notice that all 5 pieces of evidence here are themselves connected in a web of corroboration, because they are impressions of an event that actually occurred and themselves form a picture of what actually happened.

Forensically destroyed bra clasps and blood negative dna negative luminol stains and random blood on sinks floating around in the ether untethered to anything is exactly what we would expect if the prosecution was just desperately trying to construct evidence and a case from nothing but noise and biased contrived sampling. Where are Amanda's wounds she bled from? Where's the sign of the cleanup that created the luminol stains? Why was she spotted by an eyewitness comfortably settled in to her boyfriends apartment mere minutes before the crime occurred? Etc. Being a delusional guilter prevents you from spotting that none of the evidence is connected. It's sad for them and I thank the goddesses by their Divine Grace that I wasn't cursed with a simple mind.
Sorry to break it to you but Guede has no criminal record of trespassing or breaking in.

No point reading any further.

As for your last sentence...say no more.
__________________
Then let the way appear, steps unto heav'n.
All that thou sendest me, in mercy giv'n.'
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 13th October 2019, 03:58 AM   #3238
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,073
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
If it is incorrect that weight x velocity equals distance travelled of a thrown inanimate obiect, how come when I was watching the mm-world championship athletics t'other day a narrrative came up on my screen displaying at what velocity each javelin thrower threw his javelin as it lauched in the air? Surely there must be a link for the highest speed at release were also the ones that seemed to travel the furthest. (134 mpk iirc.)


Oh. My. Word.

Hint: it is incorrect that weight (I assume you ACTUALLY mean mass) x velocity equals distance travelled of a thrown inanimate object. Stunningly incorrect.


ETA: By the way, what are your feelings on the other science zingers of yours in that list? Incredulous minds would love to know.

ETA2: And since you're here, how are you doing in addressing your lie that you have reliable evidence showing that the Knox family engaged in a "$2 million PR campaign"? Or are you perhaps ready to perform a miracle worth of Cardinal Newman and admit that you have no such evidence, and that this "$2 million PR campaign" crap was a wholesale invention of the pro-guilt community....?

Last edited by LondonJohn; 13th October 2019 at 04:08 AM.
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 13th October 2019, 04:02 AM   #3239
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,073
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
FYI The bra clasp was originally found UNDER the body which was UNDER a duvet UNDER scattered bits of paper that the 'interrupted burglar' was scattering during his burglary BEFORE being 'interrupted' by Mez.

How did Raff's DNA get to there from the door?

Go figure.


Where was the bra clasp situated when it was RECOVERED FOR ANALYSIS, Vixen?

Jeez


Hint #2 in a never-ending series: when it was actually recovered for analysis, in mid-December, the bra clasp was in the midst of a pile of debris and dust that had been seemingly swept under a rug at least a metre away from where it had been on the afternoon of November 2nd.....
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 13th October 2019, 04:03 AM   #3240
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 14,073
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Sorry to break it to you but Guede has no criminal record of trespassing or breaking in.

No point reading any further.

As for your last sentence...say no more.


Sorry to break it to you but neither Knox nor Sollecito has any criminal record for anything to do with the murder of Meredith Kercher.

No point in reading literally anything you write.
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
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 09:29 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.