Henry and PR, you two are adorable

Aces, again, could you be very specific on these two claims [of botched investigation and butchered forensics work]? These are the same offices that successfully processed Guede's evidence without complaint from anyone so I am especially interested in which department and at which stages the investigation can be said to have been "butchered."

just went to friends of amanda site

http://friendsofamanda.org/cleanup.html

welp, that settles that

Just trying to read up on this now, sorry if I sound like a noob.

Did Knox and Raff basically try to clean up their own mess, but left all the evidence that pointed to Guede...attempting to put all the blame on him?

How can he just sit back and say nothing, because he doesn't believe in snitching? Or is it that he has been paid off?

I'm not convinced by either of those reasons..

you are getting your ass handed to you ITT.

i'm interested to hear how you believe that Raf's DNA could have shown up on the bra clasp then? do you realize how difficult it is for DNA to be transfered?

you sound like a dumb conspiracy theorist

so tilting

Yes

Nobody knows why he won't talk but bribe, threat, or just code are all options. He seemed ready to do so at one point and then went silent. He has stated that they were involved.

Rudy's cellmate claims that Rudy told him that all three were involved with Raf doing the actual killing. This is the same person who also testified that Rudy told him that it was Rudy and a unnamed individual. Rudy denied that and the cellmate eventually conceded that he lied because he was offered a bribe. Since this guy changes his story so many times it is impossible to believe anything he says although he is not the only witness who has come forward and claimed they were offered bribes.

I love it when Europeans act like their countries are bastions of racial tolerance. It's cute.

Henry where can I find the report in photographic form?

http://www.perugiamurderfile.org/gal...hp?album_id=21

is this their bathroom? and the bathroom showing all the blood could only be seen in that condition through luminol or is that how it looked when police arrived?

The bottom picture is with luminal. The top picture is how it was when the police arrived.

http://viewfromwilmington.blogspot.c...-of-blood.html

This is a great blog post that discusses luminol testing and testing for the presence of DNA. It casts serious doubt on the prosecution's forensic methods. Basically, the alleged bloody footprints were probably not bloody. Also, the presence of DNA does not mean that blood was the source of the DNA. So the alleged mixing of Amanda and Meredith's DNA in the bathroom does mean that Amanda and Meredith's blood was mixed together in the bathroom.

Henry - is it your assertion that the bottom picture shows areas that were covered with blood and then cleaned up by Foxy Knoxy and Raffaele?

That is Amanda's and Meredith's shared bathroom. It looked to the naked eye as an ordinary, non-murder bathroom. The Luminol reacts with residual iron in the blood to produce a visible colour, and shows what the room looked like before it was cleaned.

Defense argued that it could have been fruit juice.

You say that I can't say maybe to things but isn't that what you are doing a lot. That's exactly what circumstantial evidence is a big MAYBE.

But you are willing to convict and condemn Amanda just because you think circumstantial evidence and tainted DNA is enough. You say DNA wasn't tainted but obviously enough people especially the jurors in the case do think the DNA was indeed tainted to overrule the original murder conviction.

I'd be terrified to have a group of like minded jurors like you trying to decide
my fate if I'm ever in a case where there is circumstantial evidence against me but I'm innocent. I'd be dead man walking for sure.

Like what I said in my earlier post about my EX-gf trying to kill herself. You would convict based on all of the circumstantial evidence against me but you would be condemning an innocent person to life in person or death.

You would be sure in your mind I was guilty of murdering my ex-gf. Since you would ask me what sane person would try to wrestle away a knife from somebody who already stabbed themselves once in the chest. Why didn't I call the police right away and treat the wound instead. That I must have committed the crime in a heat of rage/passion since I found out she was cheating on me. Yeah circumstantial evidence is great.

After reading the link I don't trust the content since what he said about TMB testing contradicts what I know about it and also what Amanda's experts testified to. It is beyond my knowledge to call BS but the blogger does directly contradict testimony that was given by the academics who reviewed the DNA evidence so for me that raises concerns about the blogger. There is a 2P2 who can address this but I don't know if he has posted in this topic or is following it.

Based on the patten I can't see what anyone else would conclude. Someone cleaned up in that bathroom after a bloody event and then cleaned the bathroom.

We know it wasn't Rudy. We know it was someone who was comfortable spending the time required. We know that the footprint left in blood on the mat matches Raf.

What other conclusion would someone come to?

Don't know about disregarding the bloody footprints (there were some "negative" impressions in puddles of blood, and other "positive" impressions of-- presumably-- blood. While it's possible that the positive impressions weren't blood, before the idea is totally rejected another, a better explanation must take its place. As I said, the defence offered fruit juice as an explanation, which reacts to Luminol (but not as strongly), but then you have to get into on what occasion was all this juice being tossed around and then try to verify it.

(But then you don't necessarily want to pursue the fruit juice hypothesis too enthusiastically, because in so doing you are implicitly or explicitly accepting that the footprints belong to the people accused.)

Instead there was plenty of blood to be tracked around, and absent a compelling alternative they sanely concluded that bloody footprints in the same house as a recent murder is pretty much the only place they're ever seen. Honestly it's a bit daft to debate what else those footprints could possibly be under these circumstances.



To the other point, Massei considered that the mixed DNA wasn't a blood/blood mix. Any bodily source will do it, so skin from vigorous scrubbing seems possible. That the samples were mixed (landed together and dribbled down the sink together) was accepted since two samples landing in the same place at different times would have registered distinct origins even if the end point was intermingled.

From the link I posted: "However the pink color may have been from using the Kastle-Meyer reagent over a large surface area and allowing air to oxidize the phenolphthalin. However, the color may have instead been the result of reagents used for latent fingerprint analysis. The pink photo at the top of this page was apparently not entered into evidence at the trial."

Was the photo entered in to evidence in the original trial? If not then why?

No. Claiming the door may have been closed sometimes when the two other roommates testified that it was never closed contradicts stuff known to be true. That is very different than presenting facts and then stating that given those facts there is really only one explanation that makes sense to any reasonable person.

We don't know what the jury thinks yet but that lay people fail to understand expert testimony is not uncommon and actually a big concern for lawyers dealing with cases that hinge on expert testimony.

I don't see how the story you told us would lead to the kind of evidence that was available in this case unless after your GF died you managed to make a long series of stupid decisions that no one would make.

I thought Meredith had a boyfriend? I read about him somewhere when he stated that Amanda was acting strange and was suspicious of her.

I realize people screw around all the time, but Meredith seems to be portrayed as the type that wouldn't be screwing around on her boyfriend.

Was the boyfriend ever interviewed about their relationship, whether it was serious and if they were exclusive?

If she was devoted to her boyfriend and they were serious, then it seems reasonable to conclude Rudy is lying about their contact being consensual.

Where am I going wrong here?

Luminol doesn't dry pink.

Edit: source of pink stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kastle-Meyer_test

well yea, it's pretty obvious Rudy lied. that's why he did the fast track trial and got 16 years in jail

i'm quoting this because chico either doesn't read or isn't very smart. his ex-gf example is pointless and irrelevant