Sunday, May 10, 2020
Does This Knox DNA Evidence Add To The Proofs She Was Part Of The Pack Attack?
Posted by The Machine
Professor Vinci
1. Context Within The Wider Case
One aspect of the case that incessantly amuses Italians? Sollecito and Knox stabbing each other in the back again and again and again.
More often the aggressor has been Sollecito, who angrily sold Knox down the river on the night they were both arrested, and, despite the absurd claims in Honour Bound, he never confirmed her final alibi from 2007 through 2015.
In mid 2008 their lawyers forced a truce of sorts upon them. But then in October this happened.
The Sollecito defense witness Professor Francesco Vinci implied that the evidence was strong if not quite definitive that Knox had indeed attacked Meredith inside her room and, like Sollecito, had left her DNA on Meredith’s bra clasp.
”Lawyers for Mr Sollecito have told the judge that, according to a forensic expert called by the defence, Ms Knox’s DNA is on Ms Kercher’s bloodied bra-strap as well as that of Mr Sollecito and Rudy Guede.” (Richard Owen, The Times)
“Francesco Vinci, a forensic science expert hired by Sollecito’s legal team, said the DNA of all three suspects and two other unidentified people might be on the bra. Sollecito’s lawyers say this proves their theory that the clasp was contaminated after police mistakenly left it on the floor of Kercher’s bedroom for weeks before testing it.” (Tom Kington, The Guardian).
Now, many who simply don’t know the case - ignoring Knox’s lamp inside Meredith’s locked door, and ignoring Meredith’s DNA mingled with Knox’s in several locations - claim that there’s zero evidence of Knox being in the room.
One instance. In the final Cassation report Judge Marasca claimed the lack of biological traces attributable to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in Meredith’s room was “proof” they weren’t physically involved in her murder.
It was a point he made repeatedly. He clearly doesn’t understand one of the most basic tenets of forensic science i.e. absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence.
Ted Simon
Another instance. The hapless lawyer Ted Simon, who represented Amanda Knox to American media for a while, also claimed there were no biological traces attributable to Knox in Meredith’s room.
He was like a stuck record in media interviews - he hammered this particular point over and over again as if this was exculpatory evidence that by itself proves Knox wasn’t involved in Meredith’s death - which of course isn’t true.
“There was no hair, fiber, footprint, shoe print, handprint, palm print, fingerprint, sweat, saliva, DNA of Amanda Knox in the room where Meredith Kercher was killed,” attorney Theodore Simon told TODAY’s Savannah Guthrie. “That in and of itself tells you unassailably that she is innocent.” (CNN)
To which we showed up his sheer absurdity in responding:
“There was no hair, fiber, footprint, shoe print, handprint, palm print, fingerprint, sweat, saliva, DNA of Rudy Guede in the bathroom where there was a bloody footprint of RS and DNA of Knox,” attorney Theodore Simon told TODAY’s Savannah Guthrie. “That in and of itself tells you unassailably that Guede did not do the crime alone.”
“There was no hair, fiber, footprint, shoe print, handprint, palm print, fingerprint, sweat, saliva, DNA of Rudy Guede in Filomena’s room where the breakin was staged, though there was Knox’s DNA” attorney Theodore Simon told TODAY’s Savannah Guthrie. “That in and of itself tells you unassailably that Amanda Knox is framing him.”
“There was no hair, fiber, footprint, shoe print, handprint, palm print, fingerprint, sweat, saliva, DNA of Amanda Knox in the bedroom where Knox said she slept,” attorney Theodore Simon told TODAY’s Savannah Guthrie. “That in and of itself tells you unassailably that Knox did not even live in the flat.”
2. A Close Look At The Bra Clasp Evidence
A number of DNA experts disagree with claims like these that there was no trace of Amanda Knox in Meredith’s room, and that that by itself proved innocence.
The fact that one of Sollecito’s defence experts, Professor Vinci, had claimed Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra clasp was quite widely reported in the English media at the time.
I don’t recall ever seeing any mention of Professor Vinci’s findings in any articles in the US media. It seems that David Marriott made sure via his usual threats to brush this under the carpet.
The default position of the defence experts is that ALL the DNA evidence against the two white people was contaminated and predictably Professor Vinci does take this line too. Money talks - just ask Ted Simon. He dramatically changed his tune with regard to the strength of evidence against Amanda Knox as soon as he was hired by her family.
But Professor Vinci does devote four pages of his official court report - pages 9-12 - to explaining why he believes Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra clasp. He thinks the peaks defined by Dr. Stefanoni as “stutter bands” were actually the genetic profiles of both Knox and Guede.
Professor Vinci’s Report (translated)
From our observations, as stated above and in particular to our different interpretation of the peaks defined by Dr. Stefanoni as “stutter bands” lead us to believe
for the marker D8S1179, the definition of alleles 11 (although being slightly below the threshold), 12 and 14, would show compatibility with the Knox (11/12) and Guede (14/14) genotypes;
for the marker D21S11, the definition of the allele 29 in addition to those defined in the profile indicated by Dr. Stefanoni, identifies the compatibility with the genotypes of Knox (29/30), and of Guede (29/29);
for the CFS1P0 marker, the new profile definition highlights the compatibility with the Knox profile (29/30);
for the D3S1358 marker, the new profile definition shows compatibility with the Guede genotypes (15/15, although 15 is just below the 50 RFU threshold) and Knox (15/18, although 15 is slightly below 50 RFU threshold);
for the TH01 marker, the new profile definition highlights the compatibility with the Knox (6/8) and Guede (7/9, genotypes, where however the allele 7 can only be hypothesized because the characteristics related to the area, at the allelic definition and at the height of the peak);
for the D13S317 marker, the compatibility with the Knox genotypes is highlighted (11/13,
where however the allele 11 can only be hypothesized for the D16S539 marker, compatibility with the Knox genotype (10/11) and the Guede genotype (9/11, where the allele 9 can only be hypothesized because the characteristics relating to the area, to the definition are missing allelic and at the height of the peak);
for the D2S1338 marker, the analysis of the new profile shows compatibility with the Guede genotype (16/23) and with the Knox genotype (18/20, where 18 can only be hypothesized below the 50 RFU threshold);
for the D19S433 marker, the analysis of the new profile shows compatibility with that of Knox (13/16, 2, although the latter can only be hypothesized because it lacks the information necessary for its definition); and with that of Guede (13 / 14.2, although the latter can only be hypothesized because it lacks the information necessary for its definition);
for the TP0X marker, the analysis of the new profile highlights compatible with that of Knox (8/8) and with that of Guede (8/9);
for the D18S51 marker, the analysis of the new profile highlights compatible with that of Knox (13/17) and with that of Guede (14/15);
for the D5S818 marker, the analysis of the new profile highlights compatible with that of Knox (13/13) and with that of Guede (12/13);
CONCLUSIVE SUMMARY
On the basis of what has been observed, the superficiality in the attribution of the alleles and the intrinsic complexity of the interpretation of a mistra made up, in our opinion, of at least 3 different DNAs, in addition to Kercher’s.
In considering the alleles and the underlying areas for each peak, it is evident that they are the expression of various genotypic combinations in addition to those considered compatible.
In relation to the latter aspect, it should be emphasized that in light of the new profile obtained by us, considering the alleles previously omitted, compatibility with further genetic profiles other than that of Raffaele Sollecito is highlighted; especially these genetic profiles
In relation to this last aspect, it should be emphasized that the new profile by us, considering the previously omitted alleles, highlights the compatibility with further genetic profiles other than that of Raffaele Sollecito, in particular these genetic profiles are compatible with some attributes to Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede.
And here is his conclusion on pages 11-12.
‘in particulari questi profili genetici risultano compatibili con alcuni marcatori attributi a Amanda Knox e Rudy Guede’
‘in particular these genetic profiles are compatible with some markers attributed to Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede’.
You can see his detailed analysis in Italian on our Wiki.
There are a couple of points that should make everyone pause for thought: (1) Professor Vinci was still a defence expert, so he wouldn’t really want to express an opinion that wrongly implicated Sollecito’s co-defendant; and (2) General Garofano agrees that Amanda Knox’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra clasp.
General Garofano
General (and Professor) Garofano gives a detailed explanation why in Paul Russell’s Darkness Descending.
”Look at the electropherogram and compare the three. Of course, Meredith’s DNA is overwhelmingly present, but look at this. If we go along the graph line, yes we have a lot of Raffaele too, but in the first locus we have eleven and twelve STRs, which is the same as in Amanda’s DNA profile, twenty-nine and thirty X remember - one from the father and one from the mother - in the second, eight, and eleven in the third, also the same as Amanda’s DNA profile, maybe a fifteen in the fifth…look, ten out of 15 loci have peaks that correspond to Amanda DNA’s profile. The hypothesis is that Amanda also touched the bra clasp.
My conclusion is that the bra clasp certainly works as a piece of evidence - it is a strong clue against the suspects Amanda and Raffaele. The RFU number is high enough. So the result is perfect.”
Amanda Knox’s supporters try hard to dismiss Professor Garofano because he clearly considers Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are guilty.
However, it should be pointed out that he has impeccable credentials as an DNA expert. He was the founder of the RIS Caribinieri labs. That’s the equivalent of him being the head of the Forensic Science Service in England or the head of the FBI’s forensic science labs at Quantico.
When the Darknesss Descending authors approached him, they didn’t know whether he would accept or reject the Scientific Police’s forensic findings. He gave his expert opinion as an impartial scientist after carefully studying the evidence and analysing the DNA test results.
According to the authors of Darkness Descending, Dr Stefanoni also thought Amanda Knox’s partial DNA profile was on Meredith’s bra clasp.
“Two different graphs had been drawn from the material extracted from the bra clasp, one for the cloth and one for the bent hook. The cloth clearly indicated Meredith, and only Meredith. But the hook showed at least three peaks for every locus. Each peak had a little number by it, which indicated the number of repeats in the sample of that particular molecule. The numbers indicated the distinguishing features of the individual who had touched the bra clasp. The numbers rang out.
“Stefanoni spelled it out ‘Locus D8S1179,13,10,5 - yes, this works for Sollecito, Meredith and Amanda. Locus D18S51, D19S433, TH01, FGA - Sollecito and Meredith plus an unknown person.”
The police scientist called out all sixteen loci and after each the numbers set next to the peaks. They fit perfectly with Raffaele Sollecito and partially with Amanda Knox - DNA from both of them was on the bra clasp. End of story, they felt.
“Stefanoni was pleased. This was the first strong evidence they had against Raffaele Sollecito. The presence of Amanda Knox was a very reassuring bonus.”
After reading Professor Vinci’s reasons for believing Amanda Knox’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra clasp in his official court report, you’ll see they are essentially the same as Dr Stefanoni’s. They mention the same Locus numbers.
Dr Stefanoni may have had a somewhat different interpretation with regard to the significance of this incomplete profile because she didn’t present this as evidence against Knox at the trial. Of course she had plenty of strong evidence of her own.
Professor Balding
Professor David Balding also acknowledged some of the additional peaks matched Knox’s DNA profile. However, like Dr Stefanoni, he attached no importance to it:
“Of the 24 additional peaks identified by Vecchiotti and Conti (2), of which 6 had heights below the threshold of 50 relative fluorescence units, 9 are included in the profile of the other codefendant, Knox, providing apparent support for the presence of DNA from her. However, four of her alleles were not observed, including two homozygotes, which are less prone to dropout.
These interpretations pose problems for standard methods of evidence evaluation because of the alleles not attributable to any of the profiled individuals, uncertainty over whether or not Knox is a contributor, and the need to allow for the possibility that subthreshold peaks may be allelic.” (Professor Balding).
Professor Anna Barbaro
The 2008 report of Professor Barbaro - the DNA expert hired by Rudy Guede’s lawyers - helps you better understand Professor Vinci’s findings.
She created a table of the DNA results for 165B on pages 5-6 of that report.
Dr Barbaro disagrees with Professor Vinci’s claim that Guede’s DNA was also on Meredith’s bra clasp because if it had been, it would have been identified by the Y haplotype test, which is a more sensitive test
She also has impressive credentials. She is the Chief of the Forensic Genetics Department at SIMEF in Reggio Calabria, Italy, and teaches Forensic Genetics at the 2nd Level Master in Forensic Sciences of the University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Italy.
She serves as the founder and president of the Worldwide Association of Women Forensic Experts (WAWFE).
Accordiing to Barbie Nadeau in the Daily Beast Professor Vincenzo Pascali, Sollecito’s chief forensic consultant, also found Knox’s DNA on Meredith’s bra.
“Vincenzo Pascali, the chief forensic consultant who was set to give expert testimony about the possible contamination of the bra clasp, walked off the case last month, reportedly leaving a €50,000 bill. Back in September, Pascali, who declined to comment for this story, hinted that the clasp also contained Knox’s DNA.”
I think we can safely infer from Professor Pascali’s refusal to deny that Amanda Knox’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra clasp that he thinks it was.
It’s also telling that he stopped representing Sollecito without giving any explanation. Why would he walk off a case where he was being paid a fortune? Does he think the DNA evidence implicates Knox and Sollecito in Meredith’s murder?
3. Certain Conclusions
It’s clear that forensic science isn’t like mathematics where there are no alternative interpretations. Forensic scientists have to interpret the test results and sometimes there isn’t a consensus.
Dr Stefanoni and Professor Balding attach no importance to the partial LCN DNA profiles on Meredith’s bra clasp.
Professor Vinci thinks Amanda Knox and Rudy Guede’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra clasp, but he claims it was contaminated.
Professor Garofano also thinks Amanda Knox’s DNA was on Meredith bra clasp and regards it as a strong clue against her. He thinks she touched it. In other words, he thinks she was involved in the stripping of Meredith.
The fact that Professor Garofano thinks Knox’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra clasp and that it’s a strong clue against her gives me real pause for thought because he is the “father” of Italy’s forensic science capability. Also he has no financial incentive to promote a particular theory - unlike Professor Vinci who had no choice, but to claim the bra clasp was contaminated.
We repeatedly see the same Amanda Knox - Raffaele Sollecito - Rudy Guede combination in the tragic case.
All three lied repeatedly to the police.
All three are implicated by the DNA evidence.
All three are implicated by the bloody footprints at the cottage because they matched their foot sizes.
Let’s assume for a moment that Professor Vinci is right and Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito and Rudy Guede’s DNA was on Meredith’s bra clasp.
Is it really an amazing coincidence that their DNA was found on Meredith’s bra clasp?
Was every single piece of DNA evidence against the two white people really contaminated?
Posted by The Machine on 05/10/20 at 10:00 PM in
Comments
Garofano has the answers. He is super cautious yet he found proof of Knox’s DNA on the bra clasp. Professor Balding is so cautious yet he said some of the peaks matched Knox’s profile “providing apparent support for the presence of DNA from her.”
That is strong coming from a cautious scientist.
Garofano’s conclusions are strong, too. He has no dog in the fight and is completely objective, extra careful like Balding with scientific rigor and not apt to judge lightly. Yet Garofano sees Knox on the bra clasp.
Dr. Stefanoni found Knox’s partial DNA profile on the clasp.
The Sollecitos hired Vinci for the defense of dear Raffaele and he found Raffaele’s DNA on the bra clasp as well as Knox’s, so then he let Raf’s lawyers argue ‘contamination’ to try to negate the clear evidence.
Then Pascali walked away from the case leaving his big 50,000 euro bill. Who wants to bet he got paid pronto (perhaps by Marriott? as well as Sollecito family?) Oh he got paid fast despite his leaving the case because by walking away he could keep his mouth shut that he had found Knox’s DNA on the clasp.
Knox probably devised the whole idea of pulling off Meredith’s bra and making an obvious rape scene. She wanted to paint it in loud unmistakable colors so she could deflect from the fact that the crime was a girl on girl revenge fight (imho).
Wow, it’s great to see photos of the intelligent General and Professor Garofano and Professor David Balding’s big wise smile, and the good Dr. Barbaro and the smart Professor Frank Vinci.
A real team of experts and all found Knox DNA on bra clasp.
Out of abundance of caution because it was a partial not complete match, Knox was given the benefit of the doubt. Raf got the same when his lawyers yelled “contamination”. He dodged a bullet.
But Raf’s daddy thought it was Raf’s and Knox’s DNA on the clasp. He tried to deflect it by suggesting Knox had borrowed Meredith’s bra and worn it, an unlikely scenario. But he was desperate to argue away the obvious evidence, so he must have believed it.
No doubt he and Vinci had a hot and long heart to heart talk before Vinci marched away to save his integrity.
Posted by Hopeful on 05/12/20 at 05:41 PM | #
correction: It was Pascali who may have had a hot long heart to heart talk with Dr. Sollecito before walking off case. I misspoke and said Vinci, but it was Pascali who marched away to save his integrity.
Posted by Hopeful on 05/12/20 at 05:49 PM | #
A quick apology to those having to make 2-3 attempts to get onto TJMK as our site statistics show.
Around 400 online at the same time has always been our upper limit, set by the server plan we have. (Above 400 really is into commercial-site territory).
At least the new Linux server doesn’t ever seem to crash as the old IP server did when we saw a very heavy load several times.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/13/20 at 07:54 AM | #
Hi Hopeful
Yes, more great dot-connecting by the Machine. Several lawyers and experts did come and go, all seeming to smell a rat. It was common knowledge around Perugia (leaks from their chambers) that the defense lawyers were despondent at various times before and during the 2009 trial.
The difference between the fast, formidable, action-packed prosecution phase of the 2009 trial, and the desultory start-stop-start-stop defense phase in which several court days were not even used, was intensely obvious to Italians.
The only consistent comeback (shades of the Machine’s mention above of a broken record) was “It was all Guede”. That sure fell flat, it was always such a ridiculous stretch - even though Guede was not even in court to rebut.
The prosecution simply sat back and let such accusations as “serial burglar” ride. They presumably secretly grinned when arcs like this bit the dust.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/13/20 at 08:04 AM | #
The crazies from Injustice in Perugia and the International Sceptics Forum have got their knickers in a twist about this post, but I’ve just presented the facts. People can draw their own conclusions.
When I first told them that Professor Vinci had claimed Amanda Knox’s DNA was also on Meredith’s bra clasp, they flatly refused to believe it. Now the translation of Professor Vinci’s report has been posted on TJMK, they can no longer deny it.
They will never accept anything that implicates Amanda Knox. They claim Professor Garofano - the former head of the RIS Carabinieri - Professor Barbaro and Professor Vinci are all wrong despite the fact they have no forensic qualifications, experience or training.
They also disputed the fact the prosecution claimed Amanda Knox’s blood was mixed with Meredith’s blood until I provided them with a verbatim quotation from Manuela Comodi, saying the main evidence was mixed blood.
Posted by The Machine on 05/13/20 at 01:53 PM | #
Yes, time and again, our new translations have landed heavily on the side of Italian justice. Creating one tough situation for the remaining mafia tools. Seemingly compelled to keep grinding away for fear of being disappeared for not delivering?!
Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/14/20 at 08:40 AM | #
The International Skeptics Forum has a near genius named “Vixen” trying to educate the lame brained Knox apologists such as London John, Stachys? et al that the DNA that Vinci found is not some random alphabet soup that could spell anybody’s name or anybody’s DNA. Vinci did find evidence of Knox and Guede DNA on the bra clasp but it fell below the needed standard in Italy, a high standard, so it was not accepted as evidence.
There are posters on ISF who doubt the Gogerty-Marriott PR campaign, quibbling over exact figures of the cost of the PR, as in “show me a receipt for the PR or it didn’t happen”.
I feel for Vixen trying to hammer nails through the thick planks of the pro-Knox fan club on ISF. How exhausting. However, his or her clear thinking shines through their stirred mud and bank of fog. Amazing debater is Vixen, who doesn’t sink to the level of the lowbrows or use foul language or rudeness. Facts are louder than crassness. Vixen has a very firm grasp on the facts, even the tedious DNA facts.
One poster on ISF even denies that David Balding found Knox DNA on the bra clasp. But Balding did, or at least he found very strong indicators of it which again, due to rigorous scientific norms, he acknowledged as not fully proven.
Poster known as Vixen on ISF has a battle of epic proportions in struggling to open the eyes of the blind who will not see.
However it’s good to see the truth getting out into the ISF discussion by Vixen’s well crafted analogies, good examples, dry wit and endless patience. Truth will always rise to the top, however strongly suppressed.
And on separate topic: isn’t it wonderful that Knox has had her speaking engagements pushed back until June or later due to Covid19 ??
The fewer of her lies the public hears, the better.
Posted by Hopeful on 05/17/20 at 08:11 PM | #
Hi Hopeful,
The crazies on the International Sceptics Forum are now trying to discredit Professor Vinci who they had previously cited as if he was an infallible authority on the DNA and forensic evidence.
They are also suddenly praising Professor Balding’s expertise because he attaches no importance to the additional LCN DNA profiles. They weren’t praising his expertise when he claimed Sollecito’s DNA on Meredith’s bra clasp was “extremely strong evidence” against him.
Posted by The Machine on 05/18/20 at 04:24 AM | #
Hmmmm. Good going, Vixen. Not the first truth-teller there. There was even one on Ground Report but his posts were all disappeared after a day or two.
Most forums tend to turn into circular firing squads. Take your pick of the reasons. Pomposity, flamings, lack of common mission, lack of a documents data base, ignoring by main media, aversion to newcomers… Managing them is like herding cats, and managers can become too heavy-handed and lose readers.
One big plus of our own PMFs was THOSE TRANSLATIONS! To me, still amazing. So many fine professionals contributed. We do still have good clones of the well-run and still-useful PMF Dot Net and (with one short gap in 2008) of its predecessors.
Dot Net did not disappear through choice. The creator fell ill, and though they really tried they could not recall the passwords or answers to the security questions, so we could not renew the hosting and name-registration contracts.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/19/20 at 09:54 AM | #
PMF was an excellent discussion forum. There was a fascinating discussion between Leila Schneps and Fiona about Conti and Vecchiotti’s report - which was scathing about the forensic investigation.
Fiona refused to take Conti and Vecchiotti’s findings at face value and she wanted to know what international standards they were referring to. She realised there wasn’t a universally accepted set of standards for the collection and testing of DNA evidence that all forensic police departments in the world had to adhere to. LCN DNA evidence was first used by the Forensic Science Service in England in 1999. DNA technology in England and Italy is arguably more advanced than it is in America.
The Scientific Police were under no obligation to follow the DNA protocols of the Missouri State Highway Patrol or the Wisconsin Crime Laboratory. DNA protocols vary from state to state in the US. Most US states don’t accept LCN DNA evidence. That doesn’t mean other countries have to adopt the same policy. England, Italy, Holland, Italy, Germany, Croatia, Austria and Switzerland all accept LCN DNA evidence.
Professor Brian Caddy carried out an independent review of LCN DNA evidence in 2008 and concluded it was fit for purpose and scientifically robust.
Fiona, Fly by Night and others meticulously unpicked Conti and Vecchiotti’s report and they did this before the Italian Supreme Court criticised their work and Judge Nencini criticised them for misleading the court and called their conduct “reprehensible”.
I don’t understand how anyone can take Carla Vecchiotti seriously. She lied repeatedly to the appeal court, she has made calamitous errors in other cases, she was fined for professional misconduct and her laboratory was closed down for 18 months because it wasn’t fit for purpose.
Stefano Conti appeared on the Netflix documentary and made some smug comments about a fool repeating his mistakes. He and Carlo Vecchiotti made an embarrassing mistake by not considering the results of the DNA two tests on sample 165B together i.e. they both showed Sollecito’s DNA was on the bra clasp. This is something Professor Balding and Crini criticised them for.
Posted by The Machine on 05/20/20 at 08:34 AM | #
PMF was so great. When I see the old names like Michael, Catnip, SomeAlibi and Ergon I almost get choked up and misty eyed. They were wonderful. The debate was so smart, so many commenters dissected the case intelligently, objectively as possible as facts became clear. They were good at spotlighting the flaws and falsehoods in the “Knox is innocent” spiel.
People shared recipes and pix of funny cats, their personal art of colorful lions and giant bouquets of sunflowers with South American flair, shared dabs of personal info from time to time to break up the monotony. Case followers always got value for reading the posts. Mimi drew cartoons.
The image of the big lion for Catnip stays with me.
The arguments were coherent. Posters undermined Knox’s house of cards so well. It’s like an emotional walk down memory lane to see the old names.
As for the LCN DNA issue: Italy should never have been bullied into dismissing LCN based on some arbitrary U.S. standard…a standard that wasn’t much of a standard considering it varied from state to state and was by no means established truth.
OT but sites like TJMK and PMF seem to be fulfilling what I consider a small prophecy in Meredith’s music video, “Some Say” made by singer Christian Leontieux. As she comes down the stairs so gracefully, sorta questioningly yet smoothly in the video opening, a large crowd is dancing around and singing “Some Say” as snow falls, the snow she loved. The message of the song or at least the title suggests there was going to be a whole lot of saying or talking about this fabulous Ms. Kercher. Some Say, Some Say. People would talk.
Keeping the dialogue going was meant to be.
Posted by Hopeful on 05/21/20 at 03:26 PM | #
Re the video of Christian Leontieux’s Some Say: In his book John K described Meredith as vivacious and chatty, here she played cool and charismatic and was a pretty good choice for Leontieux’s adored one.
Its a pity that the video was distorted, wrong upload settings; and that it had that permanent advertising bar, we may have a copy without it. Even so it was a nice surprise for our readerships.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/22/20 at 09:18 AM | #
Next post, a long one to wrap up the Malcolm Gladwell hoaxes series and stir up Hachette the publisher, will be up tomorrow Saturday or Sunday. Thanks for patience everyone.
Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/22/20 at 12:55 PM | #
The Meredith Kercher case has given us an interesting insight into human psychology and how easy it is to deceive many people. An unworldly academic called Dr Todd Grande has created an error-ridden YouTube video about the case:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga-rgA9XNWA&feature=youtu.be
He has relied solely on Amanda Knox for his information. I made the following comments to someone who had claimed that Rudy Guede admitted his guilt:
“Rudy Guede has never confessed or admitted his guilt. It seems I’m only person who has actually read the official court documents on here. I feel like I’m at a convention for the simpleminded. Countless people are mindlessly regurgitating the PR lies that were widely propagated in the media, nobody has substantiated any of their claims by quoting or referring to the official court reports and court transcripts and nobody has bothered to do any fact-checking.
Only a gullible simpleton would unquestioningly believe Amanda Knox because she is a self-confessed liar who was convicted of lying by all courts, including the Italian Supreme Court. She tried to frame an innocent man for rape and murder. It’s self-evident even to a half-wit that she’s not a reliable or trustworthy source of information. It’s beyond embarrassing.
“It comes as no surprise that so many ignorant people are making racist and xenophobic comments and assuming Amanda Knox is innocent just because she’s American. It’s clearly not very difficult to pull the wool over the eyes of emotional people who lack critical thinking skills and believe everything they read.
“Anyone with a modicum of common sense would want to get acquainted with the facts of the case by reading the official court documents. You can read them here: http://themurderofmeredithkercher.com/Main_Page”
Posted by The Machine on 05/24/20 at 08:09 PM | #
So many people on YouTube make videos about the Meredith Kercher case because they know it will attract lots of views. Most them haven’t read any of the official court documents and they just mindlessly regurgitate the PR lies.
This guy is doing a live podcast on YouTube about the similarities between the Amanda Knox case and the Steven Avery/Brendan Dassey case this evening at 8:00pm GMT.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu5MuuI04BQ
Expect lots of comments about innocent people being railroaded by corrupt cops and rogue prosecutors, the planting of evidence and false confessions. It seems Joe Public still has an insatiable appetite for these stories.
Posted by The Machine on 05/25/20 at 02:10 PM | #
Yes, Joe Public seems to salivate for David and Goliath stories, but they can’t see that Goliath is the ugly giant of crime while tiny David is our very small police force who fight daily, completely outnumbered by masses of lawbreakers?
I don’t understand the American public’s recent new love affair with killers. It’s a disturbing sign of moral decay, imho.
_________________________________
Mr. John Kercher has been dead about 4 months now. He died early this year 2020 on a cold foggy winter day, perhaps by hit-and-run driver. Rest in peace, all worries forgotten, in perpetual light John Kercher.
I guess Rudy will soon be out of prison. I hope he doesn’t reoffend but won’t be shocked if he does.
Posted by Hopeful on 05/30/20 at 10:20 AM | #
@The Machine, your link to YouTube podcast re: similarities between Amanda Knox and the Steven Avery case, was well worth watching for an example of slipshod research and tripe. Comments by Harry Rag refuted the entire pack of lies.
Michelle Moore comments. She calls the ever-intelligent Harry Rag “a completely deranged nutcase”. She denies the existence of Knox PR machine when her own husband was heavily involved in promoting his dear witch Miss Knox.
Michelle scoffs at Nick Pisa as an errand boy for attorney Maresca, says Maresca was an errand boy for Mignini.
Nigel Scott (surprise surprise) says, “I can’t believe that Harry Rag is still posting the same list of lies after 13 years…”
Whereat Michelle chimes in: “It’s weird.”
Harry Rag shuts the nutty choristers up completely with the single question: “Who tracked Meredith’s blood into the small bathroom?” They choke.
Harry Rag quotes Massei Report that the blood tracked into small bathroom was confirmed NOT to be Rudy’s. Harry Rag quotes from Judge Chieffi Supreme Court report. And he quotes Judge Marasca’s Supreme Court report that states Knox had come into contact with the blood of Meredith Kercher “which she (Knox) tried to wash away from herself”. Wow! the high court said this.
Diego Rivera says: “....everyone knows AK got away with murder.”
Corpus Vile tells pro-Knoxer Mal Daley that the clinical name for this love of someone who has committed an outrage is the term “hybristophilia” and links to that.
Thomas Mininger says Stefanoni should be “indicted on multiple counts of perjury…” Why? for doing her job?
Harry Rag informs all the nutty commenters. He quotes Knox’s own witness statements: “....but Patrick had sex with Meredith whom he was infatuated with…I vaguely recall that he killed her.” And Knox’s own words from 6 Nov 2007 where she said, “I stand by my (accusatory) statements that I made….in flashbacks I’m having, I see Patrick as the murderer.”
We all know that was a complete lie, Patrick had nothing to do with the death and was nowhere near it as his airtight alibi and witnesses proved.
Knox said he killed Meredith, that Patrick L. murdered her. What a liar.
Michelle Moore after calling Harry Rag who is the consummate logical thinker and an indomitable powerhouse defender of truth, she calls him “a completely deranged nutcase”.
She then gets blasted in return by a link from Corpus Vile to the news of her own derangement as shown by Michelle’s meltdown in Perugia courthouse.
There at Knox’s first trial during a break in proceedings Michelle who was a mere bystander and a foreign visitor to his country, marched up to the dignified chief prosecutor Mignini and shouted at him:
“You are evil!!!! You have no conscience!!!”
Police took her out of court but did not arrest her.
As for the presenter of this Avery/Amanda victims of injustice podcast which is Swiss cheese full of holes, created by speaker who has done no research on the true facts of the Avery/Dassey and Knox case but who regurgitates piffle from easy grab media, the wiser Corpus Vile comments:
“Wrongful convictions? All three are guilty, especially Avery and ESPECIALLY Amanda Knox, who shares the same birthday with innocent Cuddly Stevie as well as OJ Simpson and Jodi Arias….”
The only argument the pro-Knox nutters have against Harry Rag is name-calling and false claims he is an emissary of the Kercher family. Some equate him with pro-Meredith Peter Quennell, but none have a dab of proof. It’s merely a weak effort to render his steel trap arguments against their cutie Knox, ineffective.
They are bankrupt when it comes to a strong case for innocence.
But Knox the liar’s “best truth she can think” doesn’t stack up against real truth, the kind that Harry Rag reveals or tries to, to the half-blind lovesick calves known as Knox maniacs who excuse all of Knox’s shady ways like missing the memorial for her murdered roommate, telling police lies that jailed someone innocent, her drug use and cartwheel flipping in police station—they dismiss all the lies and this serious behavior as youthful high jinks.
Meredith’s other not so quirky friends were weeping in real grief at same police station, while Knox squirmed on her boyfriend’s lap and stuck out her tongue.
Meredith’s other friends told no lies about their whereabouts. Nor had witnesses seen them near the cottage that night. A witness had seen Knox.
Posted by Hopeful on 05/30/20 at 12:13 PM | #
Site problem? We are not sure.
TJMK has not gone down at all in recent weeks; but several in the UK are not seeing it.
Best guess is this EC requirement that readers must say yes to accepting site cookies.
If you are seeing TJMK anywhere in Europe it’d help to narrow this down by emailing us.
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Posted by Peter Quennell on 05/30/20 at 12:53 PM | #
Congrats to NASA, to Elon Musk and to America’s two brave astronauts Hurley and Behnken who blasted off into space today to link up with International Space Station. Whew! no explosions on the launch pad. They made it. Go America!
Posted by Hopeful on 05/30/20 at 07:46 PM | #
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Where next:
Click here to return to The Top Of The Front PageOr to next entry CV Update: Spreading Perceptions Of Glutathione As An Immunity-Boosting V Big Deal
Or to previous entry Why Did Judge Marasca Parrot The CSI Effect In The Supreme Court’s Final Report?