TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,958
The Trials of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito: Part 29
- Thread starter Bill Williams
- Start date
- Status
Bill Williams
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 15,713
Please don't give up on Vixen. She and I share something, neither of us know **anything** about the highly technical DNA thingies that you and others are raising.
All I'm good for is posting pics of obviously possible routes of contamination. I also know that there's no such thing as a "YY" chromosome person, because.... who's the mother?
I think I get a C- just for that, though.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Weird things happen, including Turner's syndrome (XO), but if YY happened it would be a non-viable embryo.
NotEvenWrong
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2014
- Messages
- 910
Last edited by a moderator:
whoanellie
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2012
- Messages
- 1,471
Do you think she's figured it out yet?
If there is one or more unidentified persons who contributed their DNA to a forensic sample, one cannot be at all confident, without strong corroborating evidence, that any other "suspect" DNA on that sample was not the result of contamination.
There was absolutely no corroborating evidence to indicate that Raffaele Sollecito's DNA, nor that the DNA of any of the other unidentified males, allegedly found on the bra clasp, had any connection or relevance to the crimes against Meredith Kercher. There was evidence to the contrary: 1) the bra had been forcefully torn off Kercher's body; 2) the DNA of Rudy Guede was found on the bra fabric, Kercher's clothing, her purse, and in the rape kit; 3) one does not (typically) touch the clasp to fasten or unfasten a bra; 4) the clasp had been collected 46 days after the other evidence items, from the floor after having been moved, apparently during non-recorded police activity, and was improperly collected by investigators with dirty gloves, as recorded by the police; and 5) the clasp DNA testing did not meet international standards - there was no evidence of the proper DNA-negative controls and there was an irregularity in DNA sample numbering suggesting tampering by the scientific police.
With the exception of the obviously contaminated bra clasp, the DNA of no other male except Guede was reported by the police to be in the murder room or in or on Kercher or her clothing or purse.
DNA is of course present in epithelial cells. There are many references providing information on the topic of the forensic testing of touch DNA from epithelial cells, for example:
https://www.forensicmag.com/article/2013/04/touch-dna-crime-scene-crime-laboratory
Some relevant excerpts from the above source:
"Touch DNA
Epithelial or touch DNA evidence can be defined as evidence with no visible staining that would likely contain DNA resulting from the transfer of epithelial cells from the skin to an object. Can simply touching an object leave skin cells? It has been stated in publications that forensic scientists can obtain a DNA profile from as few as five to six cells. However, just because a surface is touched and a few skin cells are left behind does not guarantee a meaningful DNA profile can be obtained. Detecting and obtaining an interpretable DNA profile are two different concepts.
The touch DNA testing performed by most public crime laboratories utilizes the same STR typing method performed by DNA analysts for the last 10–15 years. It is not a new technology. There are alternate methods of detecting DNA from a smaller number of cells ranging from 15–30 diploid cells. This is known as Low Copy Number (LCN) testing and utilizes “enhanced” techniques for obtaining DNA profiles. The experts and courts have had disagreements on its validation, interpretation, use, and acceptance. Typically, STR typing is known to require approximately 70–150 cells to produce a DNA profile."
"Contamination is the unintentional introduction of outside DNA into a crime scene or laboratory sample. Contaminant DNA may appear as background DNA, the major or minor profile within a mixture, a single source DNA profile, or all of the above. When can this occur? Before the commission of the crime, after the crime and before the crime scene is discovered/secured, during the crime scene investigation, and within the crime laboratory or DNA laboratory. (Figure 1) In today’s world of touch DNA, a crime scene has to be approached in a way to minimize contamination since one cannot see or test for touch DNA."
"The DNA Lab and Contamination
Once evidence is received into the DNA laboratory, how is contamination minimized and what are the potential sources of epithelial cells? The Quality Assurance Standards for Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories addresses DNA contamination in Standard 9.7. In the discussion section it states, “A laboratory shall have and follow a documented policy for detecting and controlling contamination. This policy should include the procedures used by a laboratory for monitoring, decontaminating, and detecting contamination. In addition, a laboratory shall have and follow policies and/or procedures for interpreting data potentially affected by contamination.”2
In addition to lab coats and masks, how is contamination detected, controlled, and monitored? Some examples which may be employed are:
Access to the laboratory shall be controlled and limited to prevent access by unauthorized personnel.
Separation of the work areas for evidence examination, DNA extraction, and DNA amplification and typing.
Exhibits are examined at different locations and/or times.
Negative controls are being used from evidence examination through extraction and amplification.
Contamination logs monitor introduction of exogenous DNA and identify sources.
Elimination profiles of past and present DNA analysts or support staff are maintained.
The European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI), the FBI Laboratory’s Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM) composed of U.S. and Canadian members, and the Australian Biology Specialist Advisory Group (BSAG) published a joint position statement advocating that forensic DNA laboratories maintain an elimination database for screening DNA results as appropriate."
Stefanoni did not follow, or refused to provide records and data substantiating, the laboratory procedures used to detect, control, or monitor contamination. It was thus certain that she did not follow the international standards for contamination detection, control, and monitoring.
She also did not provide the replicate (duplicate) DNA profiling required for the bra clasp sample and the knife blade sample claimed to show Sollecito's DNA and Kercher's DNA, respectively.
Last edited:
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
I agree. The level of ignorance displayed here has been astonishing!
Agreed. That's why it's a common experiment done in science classes around the world as endorsed by the Center for Disease Control:
...
(Lesson 4, Activity 1 Hand Washing Experiment - CDC)
Hmmmm....can you quote anyone saying this? I believe that claim was never made.
Since males carry their mother's X chromosome (they are not YY as you mistakenly wrote, but YX. Must have been a typo, right?) they can indeed be identified by their mtDNA. In fact, the most famous recent case was that of King Richard III who was identified by comparing his mtDNA to that of two matrilineal descendants of his sister.
Can you do me a favor and quote whoever said that "DNA can hop about"? I'm sure someone must have said it but I just can't find it after several attempts to do so. I know it must be there because you would never misrepresent what someone said.
Again, I know someone must have claimed the above but my search of the last several pages has failed to produce said claims. I suspect that someone who is bent, a Mason, or a mafioso has removed these claims in an effort to undermine your expertise in these matters. Just sad.
I agree! If I recall correctly, that DNA was not LCN (as was Sollecito's on the bra hook). May I point out another typo? It was Kercher's jacket, not sweater.
Really? Gee, I wish the Supreme Court knew that before they acquitted them! But, as the experts on TJMK have revealed, that acquittal will be judged in error any day now due to the judges being bent. Disgusting!
Gosh darn it, Vix! Again, I just can't seem to find anyone saying anything remotely like that. Darn bent editing! It's infuriating when posters delete things just to undermine you like that! I'd suggest contacting the mods. This must be stopped.
TomG
Muse
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2014
- Messages
- 691
I thought I'd had a good day's sparring with Rag today. He believes that Lalli and Liviero endorse the theory of multiple attackers, and that Stefanoni was the author of the mixed blood theory. It was easy enough proving him wrong, I just fished out the court testimonies of Lalli and Stefanoni and posted them in front of his face. Liviero was trickier since the IA wiki apparently only has an Italian version but I managed to fish out the relevant testimony where she admits that elements are not there to conclude either multiple or a single attacker. I even quoted from the Massei concerning Liviero and Lalli to back up the court testimonies. Rag was provably 100% wrong; however this is what he said in reply:
"It's must nice to live in your own little fantasy world where the truth is whatever you want it to be.
Dr Lalli and Dr Liviero believe there were multiple attackers and Dr Stefanoni said Amanda Knox's blood was mixed with Meredith's blood."
This was only half an hour ago. There seems to be a special sort of malaise with Rag that I can't understand. He seems to be pursuing the case as a nihilistic folly rather than justice for Meredith. He seems to be coming from a dark and dangerous place that I've never encountered before. I mean WTF!
Hoots
"It's must nice to live in your own little fantasy world where the truth is whatever you want it to be.
Dr Lalli and Dr Liviero believe there were multiple attackers and Dr Stefanoni said Amanda Knox's blood was mixed with Meredith's blood."
This was only half an hour ago. There seems to be a special sort of malaise with Rag that I can't understand. He seems to be pursuing the case as a nihilistic folly rather than justice for Meredith. He seems to be coming from a dark and dangerous place that I've never encountered before. I mean WTF!
Hoots
Just thought I'd keep this current so all can appreciate Vixen's grasp of biology.
Also this!
Also this!
Mitochondria are interesting beasties. The remnants of intracellular parasitic bacteria. They live in the cytoplasm outside of the nucleus. They reproduce by binary fission like bacteria. Mitochondria have chemically different DNA from eukaryote (animals etc.) nuclear DNA, their DNA is the same as bacterial DNA. Consequently the chemistry needed to do PCR on mitochondrial DNA is different from nuclear DNA which is why is has to be done as a separate test. As mitochondria are extranuclear they don't do sex. Only the nucleus gets involved in sex, so only the nuclear DNA (where the chromosomes live including X and Y) gets to interchange material during sexual reproduction. As mitochondria sit in the cytoplasm, they proceed from mother to child as only the ovum contributes cytoplasm, the sperm only donates a 'hemi-nucleus' of DNA. So all* humans carry their mother's mitochondria.
We are actually symbionts the products of two different species that set up home together. Interestingly the DNA needed for placental formation was left behind by a virus, so not only are humans a mix of species but they are dependant on viral genes to reproduce. We are literally chimeras.
*I believe there has been at least one child where the cytoplasm ie mitochondria was donated from one woman, and the nuclear DNA from a different woman and a man.So it may depend on your definition of mother.
We are actually symbionts the products of two different species that set up home together. Interestingly the DNA needed for placental formation was left behind by a virus, so not only are humans a mix of species but they are dependant on viral genes to reproduce. We are literally chimeras.
*I believe there has been at least one child where the cytoplasm ie mitochondria was donated from one woman, and the nuclear DNA from a different woman and a man.So it may depend on your definition of mother.
TomG
Muse
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2014
- Messages
- 691
This is Vincenza Liviero's testimony on the 4th April 2009 where she rules out multiple attackers:
Italian reverso translation:
QUESTION - One or more subjects, one or more persons, deducts it from scientific elements. If you want to tell us again what are the objective, scientific and medical elements from which you can hypothesize the presence of more people.
ANSWER - Then I have to answer scientifically that there are none, because the bruises typed can be produced by the same hand, certainly even if I count about ten. So surely they are two hands. Equally the same may have suspended a subject, meaning a subject, a single aggressor. He may have suspended the activity with his hands, so this of choking, have taken the knife and wounded the girl, even before having produced the lesions at ecchymotic load on both upper limbs and limbs.
Yet here are media outlets on the same day and the day after reporting a very different story from Liviero:
Outside, Dr Vincenza Liviero said: "I told the court that in my opinion there were signs of more than one person being involved and there was also evidence of sexual violence."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...-than-one-person-forensic-scientist-says.html
"I told the court that in my opinion there were signs of more than one person being involved," said Liviero as she emerged from the hearing from which journalists were excluded, due to the disturbing nature of the images shown to the jury.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/apr/05/meredith-kercher-knox-trial-evidence
I don't think the press would have made up a story like this but rather it's an indication that the press were being told what they wanted to hear, not the facts.
Hoots
Italian reverso translation:
QUESTION - One or more subjects, one or more persons, deducts it from scientific elements. If you want to tell us again what are the objective, scientific and medical elements from which you can hypothesize the presence of more people.
ANSWER - Then I have to answer scientifically that there are none, because the bruises typed can be produced by the same hand, certainly even if I count about ten. So surely they are two hands. Equally the same may have suspended a subject, meaning a subject, a single aggressor. He may have suspended the activity with his hands, so this of choking, have taken the knife and wounded the girl, even before having produced the lesions at ecchymotic load on both upper limbs and limbs.
Yet here are media outlets on the same day and the day after reporting a very different story from Liviero:
Outside, Dr Vincenza Liviero said: "I told the court that in my opinion there were signs of more than one person being involved and there was also evidence of sexual violence."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...-than-one-person-forensic-scientist-says.html
"I told the court that in my opinion there were signs of more than one person being involved," said Liviero as she emerged from the hearing from which journalists were excluded, due to the disturbing nature of the images shown to the jury.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/apr/05/meredith-kercher-knox-trial-evidence
I don't think the press would have made up a story like this but rather it's an indication that the press were being told what they wanted to hear, not the facts.
Hoots
Rolfe
Adult human female
Yes that has happened. The mother carried an inborn error of metabolism coded for in the mitochondrial DNA. They managed to do some fancy IVF footwork where the nuclear DNA from the embryo with the parents' DNA was introduced into an ovum donated by a woman without that defect. Realistically the contribution from the ovum donor, although vital, was proportionately so small that the baby could reasonably be said to be the biological child of the couple who supplied the nuclear DNA.
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,958
It literally took me <5 minutes to google "chromosomes" and confirm Vixen has got everything wrong.
I simply do not understand the mindset of someone who is going to sarcastically chastise someone for not understanding a subject, and then proceed to get absolutely everything wrong about the subject.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Ah, thank you. I missed that gem. Which is a bit embarrassing as I directly replied to the post. I think I was so taken by the lesser howlers that I didn't notice the biggie.
Last edited:
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
Liviero said she could not rule out a single attacker but, in her opinion, there was more than one based on the injuries.
Google translations:
It appears that Liviero thinks that the injuries were too varied and spread over the body for one person to have done. Why that would be so is unclear. To think that one man could not cut cut her several times with a knife AND leave bruises all over her body is rather odd. After all, some of those bruises could have been directly caused by the killer while others received from falling or being thrown against things during a struggle.
TruthCalls
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,958
This is how Judge Massei summarized the opinions of the forensic pathologists that testified in his courtroom, as written in his MR:
Dr. Lalli (Massei pg 116) wrote:
He excluded, finally, that the biological data alone could indicate the presence and action of several people against the victim.
Dr. Liviero, consultant appointed by the Public Minister (Massei pg 119) wrote:
As for the dynamic of the homicide, with particular reference to whether the action was performed by one or more persons, Dr. Liviero ruled out the existence of scientific elements that would allow us to formulate a response to this question.
Professor Bacci, consultant appointed by the Public Prosecutor (Massei pg 122) wrote:
He indicated that the biological data did not allow for a determination of whether the injuries were caused by one person or by several people, claiming they were compatible with both possibilities
Professor Norelli, consultant for the civil party, (Massei pg 127) wrote:
All this led to the conclusion that one single person could not have carried out all the harmful actions which had occurred in this case.
Professor Introna, consultant for Raffaele Sollecito (Massei pg 137) wrote:
He also stated that the action was that of a single attacker.
Professor Torre, consultant for Amanda Knox (Massei pg 145) wrote:
He maintained that " in any case there is nothing there which could lead me to think that there was more than one attacker"
Prof Cingolani, expert appointed by the judge (GIP) (Massei pg 153) wrote:
He was unable to provide an explanation for such a disproportion, which he held to be compatible with the presence of more than one person, but also with the action of a sole person who acts in a progressive manner
So it's:
4 for "can't say"
2 for "one assailant"
1 for "more than one assailant"
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
I agree that Liviero said there was no 'scientific element' meaning forensic evidence. But his opinion was that there were multiple aggressors based on what I posted above.
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 21,162
And guess which lawyer (and ultimately, which party) engaged the one who went with the "more than one attacker" opinion....?
Yes, folks! It's your friend and mine! Your own, your very own....... Francesco Maresca!
(And of course it's actually impossible to determine, from the post-mortem presentation of the physical injuries to Kercher, whether the attack/murder was carried out by one person or by more than one person.)
- Status