Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #12

[sherlockh]

Blood evidence is left at crime scenes. It is cleaned up, making it invisible to the naked eye. Luminol is applied a couple of weeks later, and the evidence is revealed. That is what happened in this case.

Yup, and it was concluded to have been blood. It is really strange that people deny this since it is described in the report including the reasons why the blood test was negative.

p282
In considering these specimens, one must also consider the possibility that they arose from other sources and are irrelevant to the investigation. But it must be noted that the negative result for blood does not necessarily indicate that no blood was present. The result may have been negative because there was not sufficient material to indicate the presence of blood.

For example RG's last shoe print resulted in a negative blood test. Obviously his shoe prints were in blood. They also give reasons for the negative blood test.

p282
The negative result was also partly a consequence of Dr. Stefanoni's choice to use most of the DNA to determine the individual profiles and only the remainder to attempt to determine the nature of the trace.

Also Stefanoni testified that she could see from the luminol glow that the material was most likely blood. I believe this part of the report talks about that but for some reason the translation is messed up.

p283
Furthermore, since the traces revealed by Luminol ?? it becomes certain that the traces contained human DNA. The fluorescence ?? implies that the biological material (in which appears ?? human) was Luminol-positive.

So overall the verification tests did fail but that still does not mean it is not blood. The luminol test is the far more sensitive test. I don't understand the problem with the bloody footprints. There wasn't a room full of soil or iron. The defense didn't come up with any alternative. RS didn't explain that he walked barefoot there before. It is very weak of the defense just to say it could have been something else besides blood without any further explanation.

My prediction is that the conclusions regarding the luminol prints will be accepted by the appeals court.

 

[Allusonz]

Blood evidence is left at crime scenes. It is cleaned up, making it invisible to the naked eye. Luminol is applied a couple of weeks later, and the evidence is revealed. That is what happened in this case.

If it was cleaned up once the luminol was sprayed it would show much like the wiping of a chalkboard. You can clearly see in the ILE crime photos distinct prints. Also let me remind you that they did not take the prints of the other occupants, visitors to the cottage

 

[Allusonz]

I want to point out that per Allusonz' link re the Swedish professor above that the professor was interrogated for SEVEN hours!

Why? Because he wasn't telling Perugia police what they and the prosecutor wanted to hear. And all he was being asked was when he was at a bar and whether the owner was also present.

Also it is important to note the date of this article being 12 November 2007. Thus not only was the swedish professor interrogated for SEVEN hours, that meant that 6 days after PL's arrest ILE would still not release him yet this is blamed entirely on AK. ILE still felt PL was involved.

The other thing to note is that it states that PL's cell did not ping at the cottage

 

[Allusonz]

In my opinion, it is more likely that the police found an African American hair at the crime scene, had also seen Amanda's text messages to and from Patrick and misinterpreted American slang (I believe it said, "See ya later." or something like that), and coerced Amanda into saying it was Patrick. The police arrested Patrick on no other evidence. The police kept Patrick in jail for 2 weeks.

I must agree for some reason ILE had some reason to suspect an African American and it could very well of been for the reasons you have listed

 

[Allusonz]

No, sir.

If they'd been cleaned up, then you wouldn't seen anything that even remotely resembled that it might be a footprint. Instead, you'd see something that looked like a big ink blob.

If someone wipes something away, they don't remove what Luminol picks up. Instead, they smear the form of what luminol has picked up, but you already know this. You also know that something like bleach is invisible to begin with when it tries, but luminol still picks it up. If I stepped in bleach, walked on the floor and it dried, luminol will then pick up my footprint later.

After studying this crime all this time, you know this. So why this sophmoric question?

Another thing to remember is that ILE scaped off some of the footprints made in blood then tried to replace them the next day. What we don't know is if they did replace them and if they did were they replaced in the same spot/position/direction of the originals

 

[fran]

Please continue here:

Meredith Kercher murdered-Amanda Knox appeals conviction #13 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community