• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cuddles

Penultimate Amazing
C
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
18,840
This thread has once again got rather long, so here's the 5th part of the continuing saga. Re-runs of part 4 can be found here.
Posted By: Cuddles
 
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!)
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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?
 
Last edited:
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.
 
Last edited:
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!
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom