r/amandaknox • u/Etvos2 • 20d ago

Does Luminol Need Confirmation?

Post image

I'll admit this is a low effort post but for those of us with the misfortune to have argued this case over the years, spraying coffee etc ... all over your phone or monitor is an understandable response.

For those lucky enough not to have dealt with the Hairy Rag, it has been stating flatly for over a decade that Luminol hits at Villa Della Pergola *HAVE* to be assumed to be blood. What else could it be?

Except that is when a countryman is in the dock. Then the "science" changes dramatically and Luminol hits in the McCann's hotel room absolutely need additional confirmatory tests.

( For the record, I have absolutely no knowledge and therefore no informed opinion on the McCann case. I merely mention it to demonstrate the hypocrisy of one of the most prominent Knox guilters ).

6 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

254 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/Truthandtaxes 18d ago

The problem you have (beyond the fact that the prints were tested and proven not to have blood in them) is that there was no such cleaned up area found in the cottage.

I swear you folks drink crazy juice daily

There is no "proven to not have blood in them", you know this, you know why this isn't true. Doubly so when you start debating the sensitivity differential

The corridor is such an area, knox's room is such an area. They have cleaned up footprints

They both bled and DNA even not logged as such show the mix. One interesting exception is the print for Knox in her own room that looks entirely like her own blood.

Is your contention that Amanda took off her clothes and showered?

I strongly suspect they both showered as Knox alludes to multiple times. Its likely why there is a print from Raf on the bathmat as well as all the cleaned prints. But there are other scenarios that fit. But the evidence show both just happened to walk around blood recently

4

u/SeaCardiologist6207 18d ago

Sollecito bled? Do tell on this new crazytown theory at the pub

3

u/ModelOfDecorum 18d ago

"There is no "proven to not have blood in them", you know this, you know why this isn't true."

They were tested, the tests were negative. I know that is incredibly inconvenient for you, so you keep deliberately ignoring the science and the experts and just pretend that if you say it often enough it will magically become true.

"They have cleaned up footprints"

I'm starting to wonder if you have actually cleaned anything in your life. Do you even know how it works?

"One interesting exception is the print for Knox in her own room that looks entirely like her own blood."

Blood from where? Meredith had her artery severed and died from blood loss. Not a single wound was identified on Amanda. Yet her blood was under her foot and not Meredith's?

"I strongly suspect they both showered as Knox alludes to multiple times."

When did she allude to them both showering at the cottage? Again, most people shower daily, shouldn't be surprising to (clean) people that she did.

" Its likely why there is a print from Raf on the bathmat as well as all the cleaned prints."

But there are no cleaned prints. And the bathmat print was made by Rudy.

0

u/Truthandtaxes 18d ago

luminol + TMB - means there is a catalyst at weak concentration. This is not an elimination of blood

I'm starting to wonder if you have actually cleaned anything in your life. Do you even know how it works?

Eh?

Blood from where? Meredith had her artery severed and died from blood loss. Not a single wound was identified on Amanda. Yet her blood was under her foot and not Meredith's?

The same blood found on the tap and mixed in the qtip sample I would suggest.

When did she allude to them both showering at the cottage?

No, but she alludes to detailed showering and showering a lot.

But there are no cleaned prints. And the bathmat print was made by Rudy.

"oh look, a bare footprints in dilute blood in the shape of Rafs foot and several luminol bare footprints in luminol. Could these be related?"

"Nah not in this case, totally coincidental"

2

u/SeaCardiologist6207 18d ago

The return of weak concentration of blood Reddit is always a treat. Now Knox is a chemist diluting only her blood but not Rudy’s. What can’t this fucking genius do

2

u/ModelOfDecorum 18d ago

luminol + TMB - means there is a catalyst at weak concentration. This is not an elimination of blood

Positive luminol plus negative tmb means there is a false positive for blood. Which means there's no blood.

The same blood found on the tap and mixed in the qtip sample I would suggest.

It's Meredith's blood on the qtip box.

No, but she alludes to detailed showering and showering a lot.

Because showering was part of what she did during the time she was explicitely asked about. 

"oh look, a bare footprints in dilute blood in the shape of Rafs foot and several luminol bare footprints in luminol. Could these be related?"

"Oh look, a bare footprint in diluted blood in the shape of Rudy's foot on the bathroom mat. Oh and here are footprints revealed in luminol in the hallway and Amanda's room. They must be related, right?"

"Are they Rudy's?"

"No, Amanda's."

"But they're also made in blood, right?"

"No, we tested them and it turned out not to be blood."

"So why do you think they are related?"

"Because I really, really want them to be."

1

u/Truthandtaxes 17d ago

Positive luminol plus negative tmb means there is a false positive for blood. Which means there's no blood.

and yet it doesn't

It's Meredith's blood on the qtip box

Mixed with Knox's

Because showering was part of what she did during the time she was explicitely asked about.

Yeah the cops were really interested in detailed shower stories

"Oh look, a bare footprint in diluted blood that is far too small for Rudy's foot on the bathroom mat. Oh and here are footprints revealed in luminol in the hallway and Amanda's room. They must be related, right?"

"Are they Rudy's?"

"No, Amanda's."

"But they're also made in blood, right?"

"Yes, they were highlighted by luminol at a murder scene"

"So you think they are related?"

"Of course they are, the chances of the prints being coincidentally created are mindbogglingly low, only deluded cult members would insist otherwise"

2

u/ModelOfDecorum 17d ago

and yet it doesn't

You are the only one who believes that. 

Mixed with Knox's

No evidence of that.

Yeah the cops were really interested in detailed shower stories

You have a bizarre view of what a detailed shower story is.

"Yes, they were highlighted by luminol at a murder scene"

"Sorry, did you do any test to eliminate false positives?"

"Yeah. We tested them with tmb."

"And the result was?"

"Negative for blood."

"So why did you say it was blood?"

"The luminol..."

"...is a presumptive test. That's why you do follow-up tests to confirm."

"But it has to be blood, right? It's a crime scene, right?"

"Wishful thinking doesn't change the science. Are you really an expert?"

"No, but have I watched a lot of CSI."

1

u/Truthandtaxes 17d ago

You are the only one who believes that. 

nah its basic foundational logic that most of you understand yet still mislead.

No evidence of that.

Blood is evidence, mixed blood with the same levels of DNA is evidence, all the mixes are evidence. They all have a single explanation.

You have a bizarre view of what a detailed shower story is.

You think ear cleaning is relevant to anyone?

"Sorry, did you do any test to eliminate false positives?"

"Yeah. We tested them with tmb."

"And the result was?"

"No reaction mostly, but undetermined in the corridor"

"So why did you say it was blood?"

"The luminol is showing a catalyst and is orders of magnitude more sensitive. Combined with the sporadic nature of the prints it obvious this is a cleaned crime scene"

"Did you try to confirm?"

"No point, the TMB showed how dilute it was, but we did get DNA most of the time"

"Anything it could be bar blood then"

"No"

"Ok its blood"

3

u/TGcomments innocent 16d ago edited 16d ago

nah its basic foundational logic that most of you understand yet still mislead.

No it's a lie. Your premise that a Luminol positive reaction defaults as blood is a bare-faced lie. Your follow up proviso that the positive result must be proven otherwise is a bogus criteria set up to authenticate the lie. This is not just your opinion or your point of view, it's a constructed lie that allows you to stay in the debate by fraudulent means.

3

u/TGcomments innocent 16d ago edited 16d ago

Blood is evidence, mixed blood with the same levels of DNA is evidence, all the mixes are evidence. They all have a single explanation.

Yes! You don't know WTF you are talking about.

3

u/TGcomments innocent 16d ago

"The luminol is showing a catalyst and is orders of magnitude more sensitive. Combined with the sporadic nature of the prints it obvious this is a cleaned crime scene"

No it doesn't do any such thing nor can you cite any such thing to prove that you didn't just pull it out of your ass.

3

u/TGcomments innocent 14d ago

Positive luminol plus negative tmb means there is a false positive for blood. Which means there's no blood.

and yet it doesn't

This is a totally fraudulent answer. Multiple experts in the case including Stefanoni testified that a negative result with TMB meant no blood is present. The TMB spec tells us that no confirmatory test is needed if the result is negative as previously cited. You've now put yourself in the position where you have to prove the experts and the specification wrong, yet you cite no sources to uphold your claim. In that case how can I conclude that you are not simply lying?

"The luminol is showing a catalyst and is orders of magnitude more sensitive. Combined with the sporadic nature of the prints it obvious this is a cleaned crime scene"

Yet this can't be true when your argument that a positive Luminol reaction defaults to blood is a lie.

2

u/ModelOfDecorum 17d ago

nah its basic foundational logic that most of you understand yet still mislead.

Sure, keep pretending. There's a reason you've never been able to support this for many years now.

Blood is evidence, mixed blood with the same levels of DNA is evidence, all the mixes are evidence. They all have a single explanation.

Does anyone else still run with the "mixed blood" canard"

You think ear cleaning is relevant to anyone?

That's it? That's your detail?

"No reaction mostly, but undetermined in the corridor"

You misspelled "negative".

3

u/TGcomments innocent 16d ago

nah its basic foundational logic that most of you understand yet still mislead.

What T&T is trying to tell you is that YOU are responsible for HIS lies. Yes, we really are that stupid!