1232 users online (232 members and 1000 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 4 of 66 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 54 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 985
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    I understand that four DNA sources were discovered in Meredith's bedroom and I've listed them. If I missed any, I'd like to add them to the list, as I think it is important to understand whether the room is covered in DNA, or whether there are two sources from Guede related to the struggle, and one related to Sollecito.

    This relates to the discussion yesterday, where there was some concern that the absence of Knox's DNA meant that she could not have been in the room and definitely could not have been involved in a struggle. At the same time, we know that Guede was in the room and involved in the struggle, and only three sources of DNA relate to him, while only one relates to Sollecito. That so little DNA was found makes it less likely, in my opinion, that Knox's absence of DNA means anything.
    There is DNA in and on MK body that matches RG. That seals it for him. I do not know where exactly this DNA is and the quantity or whether some of it is touch DNA. Maybe someone knows whether some of the body DNA is touch? This could have potentially been alot, I am not sure how many cells, etc

    There is RG DNA on her sweatshirt

    RG DNA mixed w MK Blood on the purse

    RG palmprint in MK DNA on pillow

    Disputed RS DNA on bra clasp

    Disputed MK DNA on alleged murder weapon (yet no blood on murder weapon)

    Disputed footprint evidence (the link in the other posts shows pics so you can see for yourselves and make your own opinion)

    RG's bloody footprints in MK's DNA trailing all throughput house

    Disputed bathmat evidence

    Remember it is prosecutions duty to prove she was involved w the murder. Bc she lived there you at least need to put her in the murder room at the time of the murder. She could very well have been lucky and either left no DNA or the police did not properly analyze the dna they did have.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
    Amber29 wrote, “The argument of no "evidence" of AK and RS in the murder room is constantly used as proof they didn't do it. Well if we are back to using that logic, then RG is not guilty of breaking Filomenas window,crawling in a glass fill windowsill, and ransacking her room all while leaving NO trace of himself there. If the argument can't be used both ways then it is an invalid argument.” (I copied this from the previous thread and merged three paragraphs into one to save space)

    I agree with part of this and disagree with part of it. Let us assume that there was no murder for a moment, just a broken window, etc. If that were the case, I would infer that there had been vandalism and possibly a break-in. There is broken glass consistent with a rock’s being thrown as Pasquali demonstrated. There is a possible hair and possible blood substance (Reps. 198 and 199, respectively). However, there is nothing which ties Rudy uniquely to Filomena’s room. In other words, if no murder had taken place, there is not enough evidence to find him or anyone else guilty of vandalism or whatever.

    I am not surprised that no DNA of his was found in her room. If he wore gloves, then nothing he would have done would obviously leave DNA; if he did not wear gloves, then one would have to make an educated guess about what he touched and swab there.

    On the other hand, the not-yet-dried blood in Meredith’s room ties Rudy to the crime in two central ways, namely the handprint found beneath her and the shoe prints. Rudy had to be in the room before the blood dried, on the bases of both the hand print and the shoe prints. If Amanda and Raffaele were in Meredith’s room at the same time, then where are there bloody shoe prints, hand prints, or footprints? Where are their bloody clothes? It is not just the lack of such evidence; it is the lack of it when there is so much evidence of Rudy.

    The evidence that puts Rudy in the flat is why I think that Rudy was in Filomena’s room. To extend this idea, let’s reconsider the bloody footprint on the mat. It should not be used as evidence against anyone, because there are no distinguishing marks. However, Rudy probably made it, because there is no good evidence of anyone besides him being there on the night of 1 November. Could someone else be responsible for the bathmat print and for tossing the rock? Yes, but there is no evidence of that other person.
    What I'm seeing is many people allowing for the possibility of Amanda and RS to be in the cottage before the murder and after the murder.....but yet conspicuously absent during the murder itself. That is, IMO, where one should use logic to connect the dots. We don't know if the reason there is not more evidence of them in the murder room is simply b/c the evidence/DNA samples of them were simply not collected. That would be a very plausible explanation, seeing as apparently Rudy cut his finger in the same room, yet the whole of his DNA collected is merely in about 4 places, IIRC from Otto's post upthread.

    There is rarely a murder which is figured out to the T and all dots are connected, and the results are tied up neatly together. Because only the murderers and the victim know the true, full story of everything that happened. And if one doesn't talk, and the other is dead, that leaves an incomplete picture.

    We do not have to know, minute by minute, exactly in what order, precisely what happened. We can connect the dots. If they are there before the murder, they are there after the murder.....then they were there during the murder. Further reasoning leads to the obvious, IMO, conclusion that they participated in the murder, taking into account fact that Rudy could not have restrained her and stabbed her in a way consistent with the evidence shown on her body. Other people were there with him. SO, now we have Amanda and RS there before the murder, we have them there after the murder covering-up, and we have evidence that more people were involved in the murder, not just Rudy. Connecting the dots, leads to Amanda and RS actively participating in the murder.

    We can connect the dots, without having a second-by-second recount of everything that happened, which we are never going to get.
    Now my philosophy is that it's never okay to kill someone. -- Convicted Murderer Jodi Arias

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    There is DNA in and on MK body that matches RG. That seals it for him. I do not know where exactly this DNA is and the quantity or whether some of it is touch DNA. Maybe someone knows whether some of the body DNA is touch? This could have potentially been alot, I am not sure how many cells, etc

    There is RG DNA on her sweatshirt

    RG DNA mixed w MK Blood on the purse

    RG palmprint in MK DNA on pillow

    Disputed RS DNA on bra clasp

    Disputed MK DNA on alleged murder weapon (yet no blood on murder weapon)

    Disputed footprint evidence (the link in the other posts shows pics so you can see for yourselves and make your own opinion)

    RG's bloody footprints in MK's DNA trailing all throughput house

    Disputed bathmat evidence

    Remember it is prosecutions duty to prove she was involved w the murder. Bc she lived there you at least need to put her in the murder room at the time of the murder. She could very well have been lucky and either left no DNA or the police did not properly analyze the dna they did have.
    So it looks like we still have only the four DNA samples in Meredith's bedroom:

    single sample of Guede DNA on Meredith due to sexual assault
    single sample of Guede on shirt
    single sample of Sollecito on bra
    single sample of Guede on purse (unrelated to struggle)

    At this point, given that there was a struggle and 43 injuries, I'm not yet convinced that Knox's DNA should be all over the place if she was involved, and I'm not convinced that Guede's DNA was all over the room.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
    That is pretty convincing.
    Now my philosophy is that it's never okay to kill someone. -- Convicted Murderer Jodi Arias

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by whoanellie View Post
    Don't forget that there was DNA from multiple other unidentified males on the bra clasp.

    MK had some sort of Friend from downstairs, I wonder if they eliminated him as being the source. Multiple DNA also raises the suspicion that either alot of guys were undoing that clasp (doubtful on what we know about MK) or that it was contaminated w all kinds of stuff in that pile in the 47 days that it was there pushed around the room.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,639
    Quote Originally Posted by geevee View Post
    I did, the big toe matches neither man. I don't think they could get an accurate measurement from a soft bath mat anyways, maybe the tile floor, but not on fabric that's made to wick moisture away.
    Yes, perhaps this is why the big toe doens't match 100%? Almost all others of the points match him 100%. So we could use your above logic and say that maybe, because of water wicking, some of his big toe got distorted.

    That chart is pretty convincing, IMO. It matches RS 100% on many points.
    Now my philosophy is that it's never okay to kill someone. -- Convicted Murderer Jodi Arias

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by aa9511 View Post
    What I'm seeing is many people allowing for the possibility of Amanda and RS to be in the cottage before the murder and after the murder.....but yet conspicuously absent during the murder itself. That is, IMO, where one should use logic to connect the dots. We don't know if the reason there is not more evidence of them in the murder room is simply b/c the evidence/DNA samples of them were simply not collected. That would be a very plausible explanation, seeing as apparently Rudy cut his finger in the same room, yet the whole of his DNA collected is merely in about 4 places, IIRC from Otto's post upthread.

    There is rarely a murder which is figured out to the T and all dots are connected, and the results are tied up neatly together. Because only the murderers and the victim know the true, full story of everything that happened. And if one doesn't talk, and the other is dead, that leaves an incomplete picture.

    We do not have to know, minute by minute, exactly in what order, precisely what happened. We can connect the dots. If they are there before the murder, they are there after the murder.....then they were there during the murder. Further reasoning leads to the obvious, IMO, conclusion that they participated in the murder, taking into account fact that Rudy could not have restrained her and stabbed her in a way consistent with the evidence shown on her body. Other people were there with him. SO, now we have Amanda and RS there before the murder, we have them there after the murder covering-up, and we have evidence that more people were involved in the murder, not just Rudy. Connecting the dots, leads to Amanda and RS actively participating in the murder.

    We can connect the dots, without having a second-by-second recount of everything that happened, which we are never going to get.
    That would make sense if AK and RS had no reason to be in that house. But they did, before and after the murder.

    People can live in a house. A murder can take place leaving Suspect A's blood. The people who live there return to the house. Are we now to suppose they participated in the murder too bc they were in the house and left evidence before and after the murder? Of course not. Otherwise merely having a murder being committed in your own house would out you in jail for murder

    There is one or two scenario people who believe connect the dots and explains the murder putting blame on AK. There are other equally plausible scenarios where the evidence is disputed or suggests AK and RS were simply in the house
    Bc prosecution has to prove that there is no reasonable alternative, they have to eliminate the possibility of alternative scenarios. They did not do that.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Land of Ago
    Posts
    15,628
    Quote Originally Posted by aa9511 View Post
    That is pretty convincing.
    Not if the measurements were taken from the bath mat.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    538
    snip
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    .In addition, the knife has a big problem bc it has no evidence of blood. If the knife was cleaned w bleach, it would have tested positive for luminol. Also, you would not have been able to clean that knife w bleach and still find the low copy DNA there. In addition, they never proved it matches the cuts.

    Prosecution needs to tie her to that room and by making this a DNA case, they have to deliver. But some of the things they argue just sound ridiculous, first, a murder weapon that has no blood on it; then this toilet story. They would have been better off going w their weak circumstantial case w the sex motive.
    From what I’ve read so far, I’m not impressed at all with Crini telling the courts that the results from the new examination of the knife were proof that AK killed MK - doesn’t even make sense to me, especially since the defense never objected to her dna in the first place. I think attributing the footprints to Ak now is out of desperation.

    I was surprised to see Sollecito there for closing arguments; wonder what was going through his mind when Cirini asked the judge, “Why leave the toilet unflushed?” I was reading his blog the other day, scroll down to The DNA Story, he actually has a pretty good sense of humor, considering… I laughed anyway.

    http://www.raffaelesollecito.org/
    my opinion only

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,965
    Quote Originally Posted by miley View Post
    snip

    From what I’ve read so far, I’m not impressed at all with Crini telling the courts that the results from the new examination of the knife were proof that AK killed MK - doesn’t even make sense to me, especially since the defense never objected to her dna in the first place. I think attributing the footprints to Ak now is out of desperation.

    I was surprised to see Sollecito there for closing arguments; wonder what was going through his mind when Cirini asked the judge, “Why leave the toilet unflushed?” I was reading his blog the other day, scroll down to The DNA Story, he actually has a pretty good sense of humor, considering… I laughed anyway.

    http://www.raffaelesollecito.org/
    Sollecito only attended the first day, not the second where the DNA was discussed.


  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    So it looks like we still have only the four DNA samples in Meredith's bedroom:

    single sample of Guede DNA on Meredith due to sexual assault
    single sample of Guede on shirt
    single sample of Sollecito on bra
    single sample of Guede on purse (unrelated to struggle)

    At this point, given that there was a struggle and 43 injuries, I'm not yet convinced that Knox's DNA should be all over the place if she was involved, and I'm not convinced that Guede's DNA was all over the room.
    Maybe, sometimes people commit crimes and leave no evidence, point here is not that the absence of evidence is evidence itself, it is that the prosecution did not meet its burden of proving she committed murder

    If they had stronger circumstantial evidence like maybe AK dirty clothes w blood, you maybe would not need to show her in that room. But the other evidence they have is subject to dispute, either being contaminated or simply evidence she lived there, that is not enough.

    How could the DNA on purse be unrelated to the struggles?it was MK blood and RG DNA. It had to be made during the struggle

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by miley View Post
    snip

    From what I’ve read so far, I’m not impressed at all with Crini telling the courts that the results from the new examination of the knife were proof that AK killed MK - doesn’t even make sense to me, especially since the defense never objected to her dna in the first place. I think attributing the footprints to Ak now is out of desperation.

    I was surprised to see Sollecito there for closing arguments; wonder what was going through his mind when Cirini asked the judge, “Why leave the toilet unflushed?” I was reading his blog the other day, scroll down to The DNA Story, he actually has a pretty good sense of humor, considering… I laughed anyway.

    http://www.raffaelesollecito.org/
    I am 99% sure AK is innocent but I am 1000% sure that if she did it it was not w that knife, that knife would have tested positive for blood, it would be impossible not to

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    Maybe, sometimes people commit crimes and leave no evidence, point here is not that the absence of evidence is evidence itself, it is that the prosecution did not meet its burden of proving she committed murder

    If they had stronger circumstantial evidence like maybe AK dirty clothes w blood, you maybe would not need to show her in that room. But the other evidence they have is subject to dispute, either being contaminated or simply evidence she lived there, that is not enough.
    Jason Young murdered his wife by beating her to death. No bloody clothing were found. No weapon was found. There were two footprints of different sizes on a pillow case. He alone was convicted ... meaning that bloody clothes, a weapon and proof that he was in the room at the time of the murder were not necessary for a conviction. In fact, at the time of the murder, he was hundreds of miles away at a hotel.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    7,952
    Quote Originally Posted by geevee View Post
    Just had a thought, don't know if it's been posed before - could RG have killed her first and then attempted sex? The prosecution said in autopsy there was no tearing of the skin 'down there' and that may make sense if she was already incapacitated or dead. Might explain the pillow under her as well, and her being moved to the center of the floor where there was more room. Granted speculation but it makes sense of some of the scene.
    I have had this same thought, yes.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    26,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Yellow View Post
    I am 99% sure AK is innocent but I am 1000% sure that if she did it it was not w that knife, that knife would have tested positive for blood, it would be impossible not to
    I noticed that in relation to the luminol prints, blood is allegedly absent and again same thing with Meredith's DNA on the knife.

    Where does the information about no blood in the luminol prints come from, and why does the prosecutor claim that the prints could only have been made with blood?

Page 4 of 66 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 54 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 943
    Last Post: 01-31-2014, 10:01 AM
  2. Replies: 1026
    Last Post: 01-12-2014, 08:07 AM
  3. Replies: 1064
    Last Post: 01-05-2014, 12:29 AM
  4. Replies: 1013
    Last Post: 12-19-2013, 05:30 AM
  5. Replies: 1011
    Last Post: 11-12-2013, 12:34 AM

Tags for this Thread