Continuation Part 5: Discussion of the Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito case

There is probably a better way of getting this on my subscribed list but as I don't know what it is and don't want to make a totally pointless post - is there a good source for the story about Comodi trying to infiltrate fake negative control results into the trial file, as aparently recorded by Galati here:

Galati p.59 said:

These controls had been presented by the experts, though, as if not effected by the Scientific Police biologist, only in so far as not being annexed to the report. These same [controls] had been, instead, shown in court by the Public Prosecutor as documents already annexed to the case file at first instance (cf ibid pp 130 and following).

Click to expand...

Questions ...

- If, in the event of a guilty verdict at a new trial (or new appeal, whatever it's supposed to be) and it was to prove impossible to get at Amanda's and her family's assets, would the prosecution have the power to make Raff alone (the Sollecito family, in effect) liable for the entire damages award to the Kerchers?

- At what point will the Italian judiciary actually enforce the civil award? Assuming a guilty verdict, would it be after the next trial? Or would it be delayed by further appeals in the criminal courts?

(ETA >> for once, I'd actually like to hear from Machiavelli/Yummi!)

anglolawyer said:

There is probably a better way of getting this on my subscribed list but as I don't know what it is and don't want to make a totally pointless post - is there a good source for the story about Comodi trying to infiltrate fake negative control results into the trial file, as aparently recorded by Galati here:

Click to expand...

I can't you give you a source off the top of my head, but I recall it being part of the as-it-happened narrative (probably at Perugiashock, but that's no longer available publically) and much discussed at the time (they were "found in the garage" as I recall).

Bottom-line is that these people (police, judges and people directly emplloyed them) seem to be all but untouchable by the lay-public.

It's only the (seemingly rare) occasions when they turn on each other that you hear of repremands or even criminal proceedings.

Supernaut said:

I can't you give you a source off the top of my head, but I recall it being part of the as-it-happened narrative (probably at Perugiashock, but that's no longer available publically) and much discussed at the time (they were "found in the garage" as I recall).

Bottom-line is that these people (police, judges and people directly emplloyed them) seem to be all but untouchable by the lay-public.

It's only the (seemingly rare) occasions when they turn on each other that you hear of repremands or even criminal proceedings.

Click to expand...

In the garage? LOL. Probably on the same shelf as the jar of spare victim's DNA they used to flush through the ABPrism thing before running the sample.

anglolawyer said:

There is probably a better way of getting this on my subscribed list but as I don't know what it is and don't want to make a totally pointless post - is there a good source for the story about Comodi trying to infiltrate fake negative control results into the trial file, as aparently recorded by Galati here:

Click to expand...

It would be information in the appeal trial transcripts. And I suspect there are references in Perugia Shock somewhere.

Twice Comodi made attempts during the appeal trial to introduce these negative control documents into the court record.

Which begs the question then if as Galati appeals... where are these documents recorded and found inside the first trial? (Massei) (this is what I love about corrupt Italian prosecutors ...they are willing to appeal matters that clearly if fully examined then they will prove that said prosecution and prior prosecutors are dirty up to the tops of their bald little heads.)


Comodis attempts were called out in court both times by Hellmann IIRC. The first time her attempt was caught by a juror who noticed it in the days case files and had some question about it. This was the document that had the dates and numbers mixed up but that which Comodi assured the court that the original file document was already in the case file. At which point Hellmann called a recess and gave Comodi some time (an hour I think) to come up with that original document. Of course she failed because no such document ever existed and she returned claiming she needed more time to locate said document.

Later...after giving the issue some time to fall from the memory of the court Comodi tried once again to introduce a different document and this was the one found in a garage somewhere and was disallowed (I am not fresh as to why this time) ...I recall that Hellmann had clearly had enough of these judicial shenanigans (in real courts they would call it obstruction or fraud I suppose) and finally told Comodi that no matter what documents she tried to enter that they can not prove that contamination did not occur before the actual testing took place. Hinting that he knew full well what happened to these two highly questionable LCN traces that just happened to be the backbone of the prosecutions very weak case.

And sure we also have Stefanoni backing up the corruption by claiming that even though the records are not available, that she "always" runs negative control samples...just trust her... So you have Comodi trying to make them up and Stefanoni attempting to cover for the missing documents by one of her sweeping illogical statements...similar to her "my lab has never had a contamination" lie.

And so now comes Galati and he appeals that these documents were not considered by the court. I wonder if he understands that finding a real actual honest document about these negative control runs is likely impossible? I doubt it because his job was to simply lie and present a smoke screen win his appeal case and his assertions will never likely be tested in any real court anytime soon.

That's the trouble with having a court the demands that you prove your innocence. All while allowing the accusers to speculate and never demanding that they provide any sort of real evidence at all.

Any chance of getting some tags on this new thread. Where are all these taggers when you need them.

RoseMontague said:

Any chance of getting some tags on this new thread. Where are all these taggers when you need them.

Click to expand...

Nah, we found it.

An Italian Judge, Edward Mori, has resigned the judiciary, and in part cites the handling of the Kercher murder case as a reason why. He is specifically harsh on the Scientific Police in their handling of the DNA collection, and by extension on the PM (Mignini) for advancing the case on the basis of DNA, as well as for the court which convicted Sollecito and Knox for accepting it. He said he watched the Scientific Police's own videotape of the collection with horror!

That's two. Hellmann and Mori. How many more are going to "go public" with this blight on the Italian system?

No Mori

Link to Mori story here.

anglolawyer said:

There is probably a better way of getting this on my subscribed list but as I don't know what it is and don't want to make a totally pointless post - is there a good source for the story about Comodi trying to infiltrate fake negative control results into the trial file, as aparently recorded by Galati here:

Click to expand...

There probably isn't any good source to your question because I don't think Comodi was ever accused by Hellmann of trying to infiltrate fake negative control results into the trial file.

There appears to be a mixing up of two events during the first appeal trial of Amanda and Raffaele.

There were two instances of Comodi (the prosecution) asking that documentation re: negative controls be admitted to the case file; a CD (in late July 2011) and paper documentation (early September 2011). I think both times this was denied by Hellmann (but I am not sure); the first time I can't recall the reason (if it was denied) and the second time there was a discrepancy with the documents and there was also a defense objection to any documents being added to the file at this late date (even though these documents were already a part of the case file in the preliminary hearing).

There was also an instance of a document mistakenly ending up in the appeal case file had to do with a document concerning Vecchiotti and a prior work she had done. The prosecution wanted it admitted, it was denied. The jury later found this document among the file and had it removed. I can't recall how it came to be in the case file but its presence was described as having been accidental.

Bill Williams said:

An Italian Judge, Edward Mori, has resigned the judiciary, and in part cites the handling of the Kercher murder case as a reason why. He is specifically harsh on the Scientific Police in their handling of the DNA collection, and by extension on the PM (Mignini) for advancing the case on the basis of DNA, as well as for the court which convicted Sollecito and Knox for accepting it. He said he watched the Scientific Police's own videotape of the collection with horror!

That's two. Hellmann and Mori. How many more are going to "go public" with this blight on the Italian system?

Click to expand...

You know this is actually the part that concerns me most...the lack of comment from the powers that be...where is Roco Girlanda and what does he think? Italy has fired this shot across the bow and then basically disappears. As if by remaining silent they can then safely bring it up as legitimate next year. Perhaps they wait to see the motivation report but this should be a cake walk if the SC actually has violations of procedure and laws...to cite.

Italian justice seems to be a "shoot, ready, aim" type of operation. I would be amazed if they ever get anything right based on how they have run this trial.


ETA I just put myself thru the Google translate torture chamber and read ChrisH link...in the end the 40 year judge states that no more than 20% of convictions as safe in his opinion... which leaves 80% to be unsafe travesties against the Italian people...and so he quit because he simply could not do it anymore.

As Hellmann said it will be interesting to see who they can blame for the continued torture they inflect on these two clearly innocent people.

christianahannah said:

There probably isn't any good source to your question because I don't think Comodi was ever accused by Hellmann of trying to infiltrate fake negative control results into the trial file.

There appears to be a mixing up of two events during the first appeal trial of Amanda and Raffaele.

There were two instances of Comodi (the prosecution) asking that documentation re: negative controls be admitted to the case file; a CD (in late July 2011) and paper documentation (early September 2011). I think both times this was denied by Hellmann (but I am not sure); the first time I can't recall the reason (if it was denied) and the second time there was a discrepancy with the documents and there was also a defense objection to any documents being added to the file at this late date (even though these documents were already a part of the case file in the preliminary hearing).

There was also an instance of a document mistakenly ending up in the appeal case file had to do with a document concerning Vecchiotti and a prior work she had done. The prosecution wanted it admitted, it was denied. The jury later found this document among the file and had it removed. I can't recall how it came to be in the case file but its presence was described as having been accidental.

Click to expand...

No one is saying Hellman made such an accusation. People here are making it. I don't find your explanation of what happened inconsistent with those claims. How do you know the highlighted part above is true? On the face of it it makes no sense. Surely the appeal court made use of documents acquired in the first instance hearing. What possible reason could there be for Comodi to want to add to the file a document that was already in it?

Conti-Vechiotti recorded that they never saw any negative control date (whether for amplification or electrophoresis). Were they just being perverse or untruthful? It should have been straightforward to prove them wrong. What a farce.

RandyN said:

You know this is actually the part that concerns me most...the lack of comment from the powers that be...where is Roco Girlanda and what does he think? Italy has fired this shot across the bow and then basically disappears. As if by remaining silent they can then safely bring it up as legitimate next year. Perhaps they wait to see the motivation report but this should be a cake walk if the SC actually has violations of procedure and laws...to cite.

Click to expand...

The Italian SC has just served notice with the upholding of Knox's calunnia conviction that they simply will not brook dissent. They are going to convict her of it even before a lower, fact-finding court has decided if she actually knew if Lumumba was there or not; knowing an accused person is innocent is a key factor in calunnia is it not?

Girlanda knows what he faces if he "goes public". The real question is - will Mori face a calunnia trial or will Hellmann? That would be an indication of a civil war within Italian justice. Seems to me they have both brought the system into disrepute....

Yikes - I don't think I've ever talked with way - not recently anyway.... must be Les Misérables rubbing off on me.... to the barricades!

I have a question. Probably a dumb question. Stefanoni found a few cells on the knife blade. 5 or 6 they say. Supposedly, these were blood cells. Most blood cells are red and contain no DNA. Only 1 in a thousand are white cells. The odds against a sample of 5 or 6 blood cells including any DNA-bearing white cells must be not much above 1 in a thousand. If Stefanoni got lucky we have no way of knowing as she did not look at the sample to see what she got.

Does this make it even less likely she sampled any DNA-bearing material from the blade or have I missed something blindingly obvious?

Bill Williams said:

An Italian Judge, Edward Mori, has resigned the judiciary, and in part cites the handling of the Kercher murder case as a reason why. He is specifically harsh on the Scientific Police in their handling of the DNA collection, and by extension on the PM (Mignini) for advancing the case on the basis of DNA, as well as for the court which convicted Sollecito and Knox for accepting it. He said he watched the Scientific Police's own videotape of the collection with horror!

That's two. Hellmann and Mori. How many more are going to "go public" with this blight on the Italian system?

Click to expand...

Certainly an interesting article and there might be more judges with similar views, but he walked not only that he’s talked publicly I don’t get the impression that dissent against the judiciary goes down to well; ultimately we have the decision it will be interesting to see their reasoning.

I would imagine Mori and Hellmann will be ignored, well at least publicly.

RoseMontague said:

Any chance of getting some tags on this new thread. Where are all these taggers when you need them.

Click to expand...

Agree.

komponisto said:

Agree.

Click to expand...

Could someone please PM me with an explanation of what tags are and what they are for?

ETA Thanks Dan O.

anglolawyer said:

I have a question. Probably a dumb question. Stefanoni found a few cells on the knife blade. 5 or 6 they say. Supposedly, these were blood cells. Most blood cells are red and contain no DNA. Only 1 in a thousand are white cells. The odds against a sample of 5 or 6 blood cells including any DNA-bearing white cells must be not much above 1 in a thousand. If Stefanoni got lucky we have no way of knowing as she did not look at the sample to see what she got.

Does this make it even less likely she sampled any DNA-bearing material from the blade or have I missed something blindingly obvious?

Click to expand...

I would assume she meant she found 5 or 6 leucocytes. You just wouldn't even mention the erythrocytes in this context.

Rolfe.

Rolfe said:

I would assume she meant she found 5 or 6 leucocytes. You just wouldn't even mention the erythrocytes in this context.

Rolfe.

Click to expand...

Thanks Rolfe. So leucocyte = white blood cell and erythrocyte = red blood cell.

If what you say is correct there should have been 5 or 6 white cells and 5 or 6 thousand red ones. That sounds like a large quantity of material to me. How come nothing was left of these 6,006 cells in 'the scratch'? Also, is it normal to not bother to identify which cells you are talking about? Nothing in Stefanoni's evidence nor in C-V's discussion of it suggests the presence of thousands of cells in the sample. And doesn't at least one of the tests for blood involve a reaction with the oxygen carried by red cells? If she sampled 6,006 blood cells how could she get a negative reaction to a blood test? She did two blood tests I believe. Both negative. How come?

witless identification

Chapter 13 of the book "Race to Injustice" is by Gary L. Wells, Brian L. Cutler, and LIsa E. Hartel and is entitled, "The Duke Lacrosse Investigation: How not to do Eyewitness Identification Procedures." In this chapter pp. 313-14 the authors give six generalizations about good practices:

A lineup should have only one suspect, with the other members being fillers.
There should be at least five fillers for every subject.
Fillers should match the general description that the eyewitness gave of the culprit, and lineup administrators should take any other measures that will ensure the suspect will not stand out.
Witnesses should be warned that the perpetrator may not be in the lineup and told not to guess.
Lineup administrators should take measures to avoid influencing the witness. [some recommendations explicitly state that the lineup procedure should be double blind]
The lineup administrator should record a clear statement of the witness’ certainty at the time of the identification.

How many of these criteria were met with respect to Curatolo and the other witnesses?

anglolawyer,

Hemoglobin catalyzes a chemical reaction like its distant cousins, peroxidases. That is the basis for presumptive blood tests. Red blood cells are basically bags filled with hemoglobin and a small proportion of a few enzymes. Some confirmatory tests for blood use antibodies directed against biomolecules found in blood; however, (depending on the specific one used) might detect hemoglobin or might detect some other biomolecule found in blood.

anglolawyer said:

Thanks Rolfe. So leucocyte = white blood cell and erythrocyte = red blood cell.

If what you say is correct there should have been 5 or 6 white cells and 5 or 6 thousand red ones. That sounds like a large quantity of material to me. How come nothing was left of these 6,006 cells in 'the scratch'? Also, is it normal to not bother to identify which cells you are talking about? Nothing in Stefanoni's evidence nor in C-V's discussion of it suggests the presence of thousands of cells in the sample. And doesn't at least one of the tests for blood involve a reaction with the oxygen carried by red cells? If she sampled 6,006 blood cells how could she get a negative reaction to a blood test? She did two blood tests I believe. Both negative. How come?

Click to expand...

The normal human red cell count is around 5 x 10¹²/litre. That's a 12 in that superscript.

Rolfe.

anglolawyer said:

I have a question. Probably a dumb question. Stefanoni found a few cells on the knife blade. 5 or 6 they say. Supposedly, these were blood cells. Most blood cells are red and contain no DNA. Only 1 in a thousand are white cells. The odds against a sample of 5 or 6 blood cells including any DNA-bearing white cells must be not much above 1 in a thousand. If Stefanoni got lucky we have no way of knowing as she did not look at the sample to see what she got.

Does this make it even less likely she sampled any DNA-bearing material from the blade or have I missed something blindingly obvious?

Click to expand...

There's no evidence Stefanoni found any cells on the knife blade. Remember, she skipped that step and avoided Real Time DNA sequencing with those samples, and those samples alone. The only record of what was in that sample is the same one would get with nothing but water, 'too low.'

Idaho Innocence Project

Greg Hampikian interviewed. "That the DNA used to convict Amanda and Raffaele was not reliable, likely a contamination, so she was acquitted."

Rolfe said:

I would assume she meant she found 5 or 6 leucocytes. You just wouldn't even mention the erythrocytes in this context.

Rolfe.

Click to expand...

Where are we getting this 5 or 6 anything from? It seems that the truth is that nothing was ever measured but some notes were back filled in the testimony to be compatible RFU levels on the chart.

CoulsdonUK said:

Certainly an interesting article and there might be more judges with similar views, but he walked not only that he’s talked publicly I don’t get the impression that dissent against the judiciary goes down to well; ultimately we have the decision it will be interesting to see their reasoning.

I would imagine Mori and Hellmann will be ignored, well at least publicly.

Click to expand...

For us in the countries we live in, it is hard to come up with a parallel analogy. Here, it would be unheard of to have judges even commenting. If a judge here got sick of what they saw, there'd never be any comment at all.

Perhaps the one lesson to draw on this is how much more "political" the judiciary is in Italy than in systems derived from English judicial practise.

But c'mon CoulsdonUK.... you'd expect the likes of me to at least post this and make the best out of it!!! True?

Kaosium said:

There's no evidence Stefanoni found any cells on the knife blade. Remember, she skipped that step and avoided Real Time DNA sequencing with those samples, and those samples alone. The only record of what was in that sample is the same one would get with nothing but water, 'too low.'

Click to expand...

I know, I know Kaosium. I have been desperately trying to keep abreast of you sciency folks for long enough to have got that and I am firmly of the opinion she sampled nothing and is a liar. The point of my question was to expose the lie. If she found 5 or 6 white blood cells then she must have found some thousands of red cells. Now, I know, thanks to Rolfe, that even several thousand red cells might well be a tiny amount, but not to you guys once you crank up your electron microscopes and spectrometers or whatever. If LCN profiling can work with as few as just one human cell, then 6,000 cells including 6 white ones must be a real bonanza! Would I be wrong in thinking you could look at them under a microscope readily enough or that some of them might have been left on the blade, available for sampling later, or that one or other of the presumptive tests would have yielded a reaction?

Dan O. said:

Where are we getting this 5 or 6 anything from? It seems that the truth is that nothing was ever measured but some notes were back filled in the testimony to be compatible RFU levels on the chart.

Click to expand...

I may be misremembering her testimony. I am sure I have seen something but I'll come back when I find it. If I find it.

I still think the point holds good. If she had enough white cells to extract DNA then she must have had a lot more red ones, and plasma too.

anglolawyer said:

I know, I know Kaosium. I have been desperately trying to keep abreast of you sciency folks for long enough to have got that and I am firmly of the opinion she sampled nothing and is a liar. The point of my question was to expose the lie. If she found 5 or 6 white blood cells then she must have found some thousands of red cells. Now, I know, thanks to Rolfe, that even several thousand red cells might well be a tiny amount, but not to you guys once you crank up your electron microscopes and spectrometers or whatever. If LCN profiling can work with as few as just one human cell, then 6,000 cells including 6 white ones must be a real bonanza! Would I be wrong in thinking you could look at them under a microscope readily enough or that some of them might have been left on the blade, available for sampling later, or that one or other of the presumptive tests would have yielded a reaction?

Click to expand...

I'm reminded of what The Machine said, when he got the closest to addressing "Massei ruled as factual that there was no mixed blood at the cottage." The Machine retreated to saying that Massei was not the DNA expert here, and we all should be listening to Patrizia Stefanoni and the conclusions drawn from the prosecution about "mixed blood".

Aside from the fact that it is interesting the places The Machine needs to attack Judge Massei's credibility (I guess we all do it, don't we!?) it still does not get Massei, or ANY judge in his position, from ruling on the factuality of stuff he might not understand as if a Ph.D.-trained expert.

I also have a Ph.D. trained expert friend who gives a lot of testimony (for hire) in court, and his point is that at the end of the day all the technical stuff he does has to be explainable to lay-folk anyways, esp. for its implications in every-day life, if there are any implications.

Guilt or innocence might be considered one of those implications!

Anyway.... back to the barricades!

I don't think that anything regarding possible cell type was proven

anglolawyer said:

I may be misremembering her testimony. I am sure I have seen something but I'll come back when I find it. If I find it.

I still think the point holds good. If she had enough white cells to extract DNA then she must have had a lot more red ones, and plasma too.

Click to expand...

I think that the only defense that a PG-commenter has here is to say that the cells need not have been blood. I don't have a citation handy, but I seem to recall that one criticism of working in the low template region of DNA forensics is that not all tissue testing can be done at equal sensitivity. There are other problems with claiming that the cells may be not blood, but I will have to defer a discussion of this until later.

Bill Williams said:

For us in the countries we live in, it is hard to come up with a parallel analogy. Here, it would be unheard of to have judges even commenting. If a judge here got sick of what they saw, there'd never be any comment at all.

Perhaps the one lesson to draw on this is how much more "political" the judiciary is in Italy than in systems derived from English judicial practise.

But c'mon CoulsdonUK.... you'd expect the likes of me to at least post this and make the best out of it!!! True?

Click to expand...

I agree internal politics rage in most institutions, I am just not sure this helps or hinders Raffaele and Amanda especially if their case is caught in the crossfire of warring factions.

halides1 said:

I think that the only defense that a PG-commenter has here is to say that the cells need not have been blood. I don't have a citation handy, but I seem to recall that one criticism of working in the low template region of DNA forensics is that not all tissue testing can be done at equal sensitivity. There are other problems with claiming that the cells may be not blood, but I will have to defer a discussion of this until later.

Click to expand...

Cell type was not proven. Correct. I mean, that's what I understand too. No cytomorphological examination of 'the sample' was conducted. But she wrote 'presumed haematic substance' and if you stick a knife in someone's throat you get blood on it, maybe along with other stuff but certainly that. So it should have been blood and if it wasn't blood, say it was exfoliated skin or sweat, or cell-free DNA then how does the knife get to be regarded as the murder weapon? It might just have got exfoliated skin cells through innocent transfer. Blood it must have been in order to mean anything at all.

With the elapsed time it's getting harder to track down the source material for this case.

My notes say that it was about 50 picograms of DNA which would represent all of the DNA in less than 10 whole cells. The cells themselves were never found. Nothing was seen visually and the test for cellular material was skipped or came back negative. (Chapter 11 of Hellmann gives the details). The original report from ms not-a-doctor should be in the case file. If anything further is found, it needs to go into the wiki for future reference.

Over at IIP, dirac_delta posted a portion of a post by "Yummi" at PMF. Yummi says Hellmann was paid and is part of an international plot that included Perugian Masonry.

Somebody's going to lose their bonus. What's the point of having a super secret untraceable contingency fund if some armachair detective on a web site can blab to the world how it was used to pay off judges that are already blood-bound to perform for the organization?!

GWCarver said:

Over at IIP, dirac_delta posted a portion of a post by "Yummi" at PMF. Yummi says Hellmann was paid and is part of an international plot that included Perugian Masonry.

Click to expand...

Calunnia!! (Italian for lunacy)

GWCarver said:

Over at IIP, dirac_delta posted a portion of a post by "Yummi" at PMF. Yummi says Hellmann was paid and is part of an international plot that included Perugian Masonry.

Click to expand...

Every once in a while, someone from that side of the fence pulls back the curtain on what this is really about.

Mignini himself said all his troubles started with the Narducci case. In that case he cited a Masonic conspiracy.

So connect the dots. "Someone" from that side of the fence seems to think what Hellmann did was part of the conspiracy, even though it is completely independent of the Narducci matter except for it being the same prosecutor.

Am I being silly here? I think at the end of the day what ALL this is about is Mignini's career. There IS no evidence that either Raffaele or Amanda participated in the Nov 1 2007 murder of Meredith.... but SOMEONE is making a big fuss that the Masons are behind all this....

CoulsdonUK said:

I agree internal politics rage in most institutions, I am just not sure this helps or hinders Raffaele and Amanda especially if their case is caught in the crossfire of warring factions.

Click to expand...

My guess is that it hinders Raffaele's and Amanda's "case". I now think there's a case to be made that some want them convicted regardless of the evidence. The last thing a country wants, really, is to have confidence lost in "the system".

I'll ask you this CoulsdonUK: how confident can the Kercher's be that if R and A are acquitted, that they have been acquitted justly? Similarly, that if convicted, they are convicted justly?

Me, I am forever grateful for Lyle Kercher's gracious comment following the now quashed acquittal.... "We certainly do not want the wrong people going to jail."

For what it's worth, even in our system here, I am certain "behind the scenes politics" rage. But I have seen judges removed from cases because they were the friend of a hairdresser who's son once went to school with the cousin of one of the participants at trial.

If judges within the system are now speaking out, what are the Kerchers to think? No one, no one blames them for wanting justice out of this.

Bill Williams said:

I now think there's a case to be made that some want them convicted regardless of the evidence. The last thing a country wants, really, is to have confidence lost in "the system".

Click to expand...

Oh my God, tell me about it!!!
/off topic

Rolfe.