Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


Last visit was: Sun Nov 19, 2017 9:49 pm
It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 9:49 pm
All times are UTC

MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE

Moderators: Nell, Ergon, nicki, Michael, Forensics Moderator, Moderators


 Page 1 of 1 [ 21 posts ]
Author Message

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:35 am   Post subject: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE


(Work done by: 'Jester')

The first chart is the image included in the letter by the 9 scientists supporting Amanda Knox. The next 3 images are the original charts supplied by Dr Patrizia Stefanoni. The last image is the knife's DNA sample chart (in blue) overlaid over Meredith's sample chart (black). All the peaks match:


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline zinnia


User avatar


Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:57 am

Posts: 56

Location: Northern California

PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:00 am   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Wow, that's breathtakingly serious evidence.....
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline brick063


Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 4:55 am

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:40 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

It might be serious evidence if the samples were more significant. Even though they look good on the graph, my understanding is that the sample sizes were below the levels considered to be reliable to establish the match to a scientific certainty. Even so, from a lay perspective it appears damning.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Dani990


Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:38 pm

Posts: 8

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 3:07 am   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Also, if there is a DNA sample, don't the police have to save half so the defense can have it tested at an independent laboratory?
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:38 am   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Dani990 wrote:
Also, if there is a DNA sample, don't the police have to save half so the defense can have it tested at an independent laboratory?


There wasn't enough DNA for a second test, however, European standards clearly allow for this test to be admitted as solid evidence. And, there is nothing wrong with that given the capabilities today's testing equipment and lab practices. There can be no disputing that this was Meredith's DNA on the knife - I'm sorry, it can't be done. The Rome-based forensics lab could not be shaken in open court on the stand and proved to be an incredibly powerful witness. They are among the best in the world. All the defense could do was to raise hypothetical possibilities and in the end their arguments were painfully futile -the court clearly recognized this.
Top Profile 

Offline The Machine


Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:43 pm

Posts: 2310

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 11:24 am   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

There is absolutely no question that it is Meredith's DNA on the blade of the knife. Dr. Stefanoni is an independent DNA expert; she is not out to frame innocent people.

Dr. Stefanoni's investigation and forensic findings were independently reviewed by Dr. Renato Biondo, the head of the DNA Unit of the scientific police, in 2008. He provided confirmation that all the forensic findings were accurate and reliable and he praised the work of Dr. Stefanoni and her team.

The Kerchers hired their own DNA expert, Professor Francesca Torricelli, who also confirmed that Meredith's DNA was on the blade of the double DNA knife.

Raffaele Sollecito knew that Meredith's DNA was on the blade of the knife, which is why he claimed on two separate occasions that he he had accidentally pricked Meredith's hand whilst cooking.
Top Profile 

Offline brick063


Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 4:55 am

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 4:42 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Fly by Night wrote:
Dani990 wrote:
Also, if there is a DNA sample, don't the police have to save half so the defense can have it tested at an independent laboratory?


There wasn't enough DNA for a second test, however, European standards clearly allow for this test to be admitted as solid evidence. And, there is nothing wrong with that given the capabilities today's testing equipment and lab practices. There can be no disputing that this was Meredith's DNA on the knife - I'm sorry, it can't be done. The Rome-based forensics lab could not be shaken in open court on the stand and proved to be an incredibly powerful witness. They are among the best in the world. All the defense could do was to raise hypothetical possibilities and in the end their arguments were painfully futile -the court clearly recognized this.


The issue isn't that it wasn't Merideth's DNA, it is that the levels aren't high enough to prove direct contact with the victim. nin-)

A group of nine US DNA forensic experts stated (in an article carried in newscientist.com), "To minimise the risk that some peaks arise from contamination, most US labs only count peaks falling above a height threshold of 150 relative fluorescence units (RFUs) and all dismiss those below 50. The trouble with the DNA found on the knife is that "most of the peaks are below 50", says Greg Hampikian of Boise State University in Idaho, who signed the letter and reviewed the DNA evidence.

When this happens, samples can be rerun, but this doesn't appear to have been done in the Knox and Sollecito case. This means contamination cannot be ruled out, the open letter claims. The same lab may also have been running DNA profiles from other evidence in the case at the same time, it says, and tiny amounts of this could have contaminated the knife samples.

What's more, a sensitive chemical test for blood on the knife was negative, and it is unlikely that all chemically detectable traces of blood could be removed from the knife while retaining sufficient cells to produce a DNA profile. "No credible scientific evidence has been presented to associate this kitchen knife with the murder of Meredith Kercher," the letter concludes."

The issue is how the DNA got there, and peaks below 50 aren't definitive - according to the letter. That was an issue for the jury to decide, and they obviously did. It's just a shame that single use forensic gloves were reused and that evidence (bra clasp) was collected irresponsibly late. It casts doubt on evidence that should have been above reproach.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 4:52 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

It also should be noted that it isn't 'required' that there be a high enough amount for an independent retest in Italian courts, since as standard under Italian law, Amanda and Raffaele's legal teams were invited to be present when the tests were performed so they could observe that they were performed correctly and the results were accurate. They declined the invitation. This is one of the reasons their complaints on the knife DNA were rejected by Judge Massei. In the UK/US systems, the defence experts are not invited to be present when the testing is done, therefore in the US/UK a retest is a requirement for it to be admitted in court.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:09 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

brick063 wrote:
A group of nine US DNA forensic experts stated (in an article carried in newscientist.com), "To minimise the risk that some peaks arise from contamination, most US labs only count peaks falling above a height threshold of 150 relative fluorescence units (RFUs) and all dismiss those below 50. The trouble with the DNA found on the knife is that "most of the peaks are below 50", says Greg Hampikian of Boise State University in Idaho, who signed the letter and reviewed the DNA evidence.


Who cares what Greg Hampiken says? He leads the Innocence Project which is a 'paid' organisation and has been recruited by the FOA via Paul Ciolino. Even these scientists admit that they don't have access to all the the DNA documentation. Scientists with an agenda have no credibility whatsoever.

And it doesn't matter what 'is' or is 'not' done in the 'USA', the 'USA' does not set the rules or the bar. Indeed, they are not even the World leader in forensic DNA testing. The World leader in that field is the United Kingdom. It was the UK that pioneered the LCN testing technique, the UK courts admit LCN evidence...indeed, view it as a most valuable tool. It is from the UK that Italy basis its DNA forensics.

It also needs pointing out, that what is important is 'not' how low or high the rfu is, but the noise to peak ratio. Note, this knife sample has very low noise on it, where in contrast the peaks are clear and pronounced. Neither are there any stray peaks, as one would expect in a noisy sample.

Finally, the 9 FOA scientists are singing a song that is out of tune with every other scientist involved in the case who actually DO have access to all the data. Not even Raffaele's and Amanda's DNA/forensic experts are arguing that it isn't Meredith's DNA. They all AGREE that it IS Meredith's DNA. What is clear, is that the FOA scientists don't know Jack.

Therefore, all considered, their opinions being voiced in this forum is redundant.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline brick063


Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 4:55 am

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:36 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Michael wrote:
Who cares what Greg Hampiken says? He leads the Innocence Project which is a 'paid' organisation and has been recruited by the FOA via Paul Ciolino. Even these scientists admit that they don't have access to all the the DNA documentation. Scientists with an agenda have no credibility whatsoever.

And it doesn't matter what 'is' or is 'not' done in the 'USA', the 'USA' does not set the rules or the bar. Indeed, they are not even the World leader in forensic DNA testing. The World leader in that field is the United Kingdom. It was the UK that pioneered the LCN testing technique, the UK courts admit LCN evidence...indeed, view it as a most valuable tool. It is from the UK that Italy basis its DNA forensics.

It also needs pointing out, that what is important is 'not' how low or high the rfu is, but the noise to peak ratio. Note, this knife sample has very low noise on it, where in contrast the peaks are clear and pronounced. Neither are there any stray peaks, as one would expect in a noisy sample.

Finally, the 9 FOA scientists are singing a song that is out of tune with every other scientist involved in the case who actually DO have access to all the data. Not even Raffaele's and Amanda's DNA/forensic experts are arguing that it isn't Meredith's DNA. They all AGREE that it IS Meredith's DNA. What is clear, is that the FOA scientists don't know Jack.

Therefore, all considered, their opinions being voiced in this forum is redundant.


Wow. Generally I read posts before responding, but that's just me. I stated that the sample DID appear to match Meredith - and that wasn't a point of contention. A quick re-read should clear up that little misunderstanding.

I also didn't argue or imply that the USA sets the "DNA bar", just that forensic experts who happen to reside in the US (or New Zealand or Antartica) produced a letter.

I do apologize for my audacity to point out that it's a shame that some mistakes were made during the evidence collection process, and that it muddied up a process that should have been clear cut.

I'm also behind the curve on the extent of the FOA Conspiracy. I didn't realize its tenticles reached so far into the corrupt and "for sale" scientific community. There are "FOA scientists" on someone's payroll? Very disconcerting.

It's nice to receive such a warm reception on my second day in this forum for not walking in lock-step. sp-))

Leave any minority opinions at the doorstep. Okay. Got it. wan-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fiona


User avatar


Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:54 am

Posts: 1080

Highscores: 7

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:51 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

brick063 wrote:

The issue isn't that it wasn't Merideth's DNA, it is that the levels aren't high enough to prove direct contact with the victim. nin-)


What you are saying here is that the results could have been the result of contamination. There is not a shred of evidence that there was contamination. If that is accepted we can forget DNA testing because contamination can always be a possibility.

Quote:
A group of nine US DNA forensic experts stated (in an article carried in newscientist.com), "To minimise the risk that some peaks arise from contamination, most US labs only count peaks falling above a height threshold of 150 relative fluorescence units (RFUs) and all dismiss those below 50. The trouble with the DNA found on the knife is that "most of the peaks are below 50", says Greg Hampikian of Boise State University in Idaho, who signed the letter and reviewed the DNA evidence.

When this happens, samples can be rerun, but this doesn't appear to have been done in the Knox and Sollecito case. This means contamination cannot be ruled out, the open letter claims. The same lab may also have been running DNA profiles from other evidence in the case at the same time, it says, and tiny amounts of this could have contaminated the knife samples.


This is incoherent, so far as I can tell. Two claims are made:

1. The peaks are too low to count: as Michael and others have said, the reason for caution is that in a noisy sample it is not certain which are peaks and which are not: that can happen with peaks of any size (though it is less likely with higher peaks). In this case the noise is not sufficient to cast doubt, so far as I can see. Rather than talking in generalities can you point to any part of the "noise" which comes close to the height of the peaks, so that it stands as a candidate for being a peak? I can't, though of course I am not a scientist. But if there were such candidates the scientists could, and should, have stated specifically where they see the actual problem lying: they did not. So far this is froth

2. A second test would resolve the issue of whether this is contamination. Ok how does that work? If you have a big enough sample to run a second test you either get the same results or you don't. If you do then you have the same profile. In that letter they state that a dna test cannot tell you how the sample got to where is was found. So it says nothing about contamination at all: and if you don't then you may have established that the dna is not that of the person you have identified and the original finding is due to noise: but you have not established anything about contamination at all: you can't have. The test does not address that at all. Conflating this does not look honest to me: it is an open letter and I assume if you are going to make big public claims you think carefully about your wording: especially if you are a scientist used to precision in your field.

A second test is desirable but not for the reasons stated. Others have already addressed why it is not essential.

ETA: while I was writing this you posted again. I am also quite new here and I do not have as much knowledge as many others: but this is a matter of logic at least insofar as the letter is concerned

I think we are agreed that the fact the clasp was not collected with the rest of the evidence is deeply regrettable. But those problems do not apply to the knife. What is raised in connection with the knife is quite different and to me the letter is very unclear in what it is arguing: so much so that it is hard to see it as honest work. That is not based on the connections of the scientists who wrote it: though there are reasons for concern on that front too, which you can easily follow up. It is based on the fact that 9 scientists are prepared to make very general statements without having seen all the evidence: that the points they raise are general not specific: and could be applied to ANY dna evidence: that scientists in other countries are NOT prepared to pronounce without seeing the evidence and they have said so; and on the fact that the argument presented is not coherent
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 5:55 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

brick -

The first thing I will say, is it is not the wisest thing to fire a 'wanker' smilie at an Administrator, or anyone, and use that tone, especially on 'only your second day'.

The second point, is that I raised the issue on the FOA scientists because you had raised it and it was not solely for your benefit, but for anyone reading this thread. I took the 'opportunity' to lay it out and counter their arguments here before they were made.

Third, if you were not aware about the FOA then you are indeed behind the curve and you should at least be up to speed BEFORE getting gobby with a Moderator.

Finally, 'minority opinions' (nice euphamism) are not 'unwelcome' here as such. But, if you read the forum rules you will see clearly what is and what is not welcome.

And if you get gobby with me like that again you'll be gone and I don't care if it IS Christmas.

Michael (Co-Administrator/Moderator PMF)

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Fly by Night


User avatar


Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:09 pm

Posts: 1014

Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 6:00 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

brick063 - apparently you missed the discussion on this board surrounding that open letter from the so-called forensic experts. Some of them have questionable credentials. It's not a matter of the DNA appearing to match Meredith - it is an identical match from the equivalent of about 10 skin cells. It is important to note that the authors of the letter have never seen any of the actual evidence nor do they have any direct knowledge of how the Meredith Kercher murder investigation or trial was conducted. They can only speak hypothetically as "hired guns" or "expert witnesses" for the Friends of Amanda group.

Don't you find it exceptionally telling that the defense groups didn't raise the arguments the "scientists" raised in the actual trial itself, as testimony taken from the stand and subjected to cross-examination like everything else was. They had all the time in the world to do so and that knife was a point of contention from very early on in the case. Instead, a weak media attack was launched after the trial. Was it because they understood from the start that these arguments carry little or no weight in the Italian court and that it would be absurd to argue about procedural elements that do not apply to the Italian court?

At the end of the day it comes down to this: Meredith's DNA was unquestionably found on a knife that is compatible with the fatal stab to Meredith, in Raffaele's apartment. Contamination is always hypothetically possible, but Raffaele himself removed any possibility of contamination by attempting to explain the DNA away in stories that turned out to be outrageous lies. The open letter only muddies up the waters with scientific crosstalk, but the fundamental findings here remain unchanged. That knife and the DNA on it remains a remarkably solid piece of evidence against Knox and Sollecito.

As you say, you are clearly behind the curve on this one.
Top Profile 

Offline brick063


Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 4:55 am

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 6:55 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Fly by Night wrote:
brick063 - apparently you missed the discussion on this board surrounding that open letter from the so-called forensic experts. Some of them have questionable credentials. It's not a matter of the DNA appearing to match Meredith - it is an identical match from the equivalent of about 10 skin cells. It is important to note that the authors of the letter have never seen any of the actual evidence nor do they have any direct knowledge of how the Meredith Kercher murder investigation or trial was conducted. They can only speak hypothetically as "hired guns" or "expert witnesses" for the Friends of Amanda group.

Don't you find it exceptionally telling that the defense groups didn't raise the arguments the "scientists" raised in the actual trial itself, as testimony taken from the stand and subjected to cross-examination like everything else was. They had all the time in the world to do so and that knife was a point of contention from very early on in the case. Instead, a weak media attack was launched after the trial. Was it because they understood from the start that these arguments carry little or no weight in the Italian court and that it would be absurd to argue about procedural elements that do not apply to the Italian court?

At the end of the day it comes down to this: Meredith's DNA was unquestionably found on a knife that is compatible with the fatal stab to Meredith, in Raffaele's apartment. Contamination is always hypothetically possible, but Raffaele himself removed any possibility of contamination by attempting to explain the DNA away in stories that turned out to be outrageous lies. The open letter only muddies up the waters with scientific crosstalk, but the fundamental findings here remain unchanged. That knife and the DNA on it remains a remarkably solid piece of evidence against Knox and Sollecito.

As you say, you are clearly behind the curve on this one.


I did miss the discussion thread on the "forensic experts", but read many others in part. I just found this site recently and there are, literally, thousands of posts in multiple areas. Thanks for the head's up on the so-called experts, as it is sometimes difficult to evaluate the voracity of the multitude of "talking heads" that have chimed in on this case. I'll search for that thread.

I still have many questions about what exactly happened that night, how things truly played out, as I'm sure we all do to some degree. If the case is so open-and-shut, though, I wonder why AK and RC didn't receive the life sentences the prosecution asked for. That alludes to the existence of some mitigating circumstances or a degree of doubt as to the air-tight nature of the prosecution's case. But for that, we will have to wait for the jury's comments.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline brick063


Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 4:55 am

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 7:08 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Michael wrote:
brick -

The first thing I will say, is it is not the wisest thing to fire a 'wanker' smilie at an Administrator, or anyone, and use that tone, especially on 'only your second day'.

The second point, is that I raised the issue on the FOA scientists because you had raised it and it was not solely for your benefit, but for anyone reading this thread. I took the 'opportunity' to lay it out and counter their arguments here before they were made.

Third, if you were not aware about the FOA then you are indeed behind the curve and you should at least be up to speed BEFORE getting gobby with a Moderator.

Finally, 'minority opinions' (nice euphamism) are not 'unwelcome' here as such. But, if you read the forum rules you will see clearly what is and what is not welcome.

And if you get gobby with me like that again you'll be gone and I don't care if it IS Christmas.

Michael (Co-Administrator/Moderator PMF)


The wanker was in bad form, and I apologize (it probably shouldn't be offered on the menu for selection if it isn't welcome, just like the middle finger guy). Your response approached me as if I was advocating FOR the defense and attacking the prosecution, which I wasn't, which prompted my touchy response.

I'm going to dig through past threads now. sur-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 8:26 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Brick wrote:
it probably shouldn't be offered on the menu for selection if it isn't welcome


If you had spent some time gauging the forum, you would have understood that smilies such as those are not in place so posters can use them to flame other posters. And certainly, it doesn't take a genius to work out that you don't use them with board Admins. They are there to 'emote' within opinions, for satire or for general commentary. Those smilies remain on site because members understand what they are for and don't abuse them. A rule of thumb is that one gets to know a board before posting on it.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Dani990


Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:38 pm

Posts: 8

PostPosted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 10:14 am   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Thanks for answering my question.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Erin89


Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:21 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:35 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

brick063 wrote:
Michael wrote:
brick -

The first thing I will say, is it is not the wisest thing to fire a 'wanker' smilie at an Administrator, or anyone, and use that tone, especially on 'only your second day'.

The second point, is that I raised the issue on the FOA scientists because you had raised it and it was not solely for your benefit, but for anyone reading this thread. I took the 'opportunity' to lay it out and counter their arguments here before they were made.

Third, if you were not aware about the FOA then you are indeed behind the curve and you should at least be up to speed BEFORE getting gobby with a Moderator.

Finally, 'minority opinions' (nice euphamism) are not 'unwelcome' here as such. But, if you read the forum rules you will see clearly what is and what is not welcome.

And if you get gobby with me like that again you'll be gone and I don't care if it IS Christmas.


Michael (Co-Administrator/Moderator PMF)


The wanker was in bad form, and I apologize (it probably shouldn't be offered on the menu for selection if it isn't welcome, just like the middle finger guy). Your response approached me as if I was advocating FOR the defense and attacking the prosecution, which I wasn't, which prompted my touchy response.

I'm going to dig through past threads now. sur-)
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Erin89


Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:21 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:36 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

QUOTE from above.

Who the hell do you think you are, his MOTHER?

("Don't you take that tone with me, mister.")

If some arrogant asshole insulted me, "Administrator" or not, I would be pissed too, and so the guy has every right to get pissed. The difference with him is that he isn't showing {as much} obvious bias as some of the people in this forum, and if he gets pissed off because somebody is trash-talking his argument, it is somewhat less questionable than showing obvious bias. This is my first week on this forum, and you can kick me off for all I care.

You think you're hot shit because you're a "website administrator?" Grow up.



Note
You have been BANNED!!
Reason: Trolling Admins is not very bright
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Erin89


Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:21 am

Posts: 3

PostPosted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:37 pm   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Ugh. I didn't mean "trash-talking." I meant, bitching.
Top Profile E-mail 

Offline Michael

Site Admin


User avatar


Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:06 pm

Posts: 16732

Location: England

Highscores: 113

PostPosted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 2:08 am   Post subject: Re: MEREDITH'S DNA ON THE KNIFE   

Hi Erin89. Bye Erin89.

_________________
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is." ~ Winston Churchill mike


THE MURDER OF MEREDITH KERCHER WIKI
PMF ON TWITTER
PMF FORUM RULES
Top Profile E-mail 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 1 [ 21 posts ]


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

  

Judge Massei Sentencing Report     The Meredith Kercher Fund     The Murder Of Meredith Kercher Wiki     True Justice For Meredith Kercher     Judge Nencini Sentencing Report 


29,437,758 Views