"The infamous international case sends an important message about the need for exacting adherence to high standards in DNA crime analysis. Italian investigators failed to take the proper precautions, an analysis of the Knox case suggests.
"The outcome is of import around the world, because DNA evidence is becoming the gold standard in criminal justice".........
"Knox and Sollecito were convicted by an Italian court in 2009. But skepticism from U.S. DNA experts led to a re-examination.
The results, issued this summer, raised serious doubts as to whether the knife used to convict Knox had anything to do with the killing. The reanalysis also faulted evidence handling that failed to protect items from potential cross-contamination.
Some of the crime-scene evidence was gathered more than a month after the killing. In the interim, investigators had gone in and out of the apartment, not always wearing protective gear.
Experts say it is all too possible, under such conditions, for a trace of one person to be transferred to another object. Increasingly sensitive DNA testing can pick up these traces, utterly confusing crime analysis — especially in a case such as this, in which four people lived in the apartment and many people came and went."
EDITORIAL; THE HERALD TRIBUNE;
-----------------------------------------------------------
"DNA analysis helped send Amanda Knox to prison for murder. Then, in an extraordinary reversal this week, it helped free her," the Herald-Tribune editorial published earlier today under the heading, "DNA and the Knox case", begins.
"The infamous international case sends an important message about the need for exacting adherence to high standards in DNA crime analysis. Italian investigators failed to take the proper precautions, an analysis of the Knox case suggests," the editorial continues.
"The outcome is of import around the world, because DNA evidence is becoming the gold standard in criminal justice.
Unfortunately, the more that DNA science evolves — yielding greater ability to detect fleeting biological traces on potential evidence — the more vital it is to guard against inadvertent cross-contamination. Failure to change gloves before handling subsequent items of evidence, for example, can muddle DNA results, thwarting justice.
Knox and her boyfriend were accused of taking part in a slaying that occurred in Perugia, Italy, where Knox was a student.
The killing was blamed primarily on Rudy Guede, a young African immigrant. Strong, direct DNA evidence — on and near the murder victim's body — clearly tied Guede to the crime, in which a woman with whom Knox shared an apartment was strangled and fatally stabbed.
Skepticism and re-examination
Guede was convicted and remains imprisoned. But prosecutors also linked Knox and her boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, to the crime. In the trial, prosecutors presented a knife that had what they said were DNA traces of Knox and the murder victim. They also claimed that the victim's bra clasp had traces of Sollecito's DNA.
These items were used to persuade jurors that Knox and her boyfriend — who denied being at the apartment the night of the Nov. 1, 2007, murder — were accomplices. Prosecutors also raised circumstantial factors such as Knox's ability to access the house and doubts about her alibi.
Knox and Sollecito were convicted by an Italian court in 2009. But skepticism from U.S. DNA experts led to a re-examination.
The results, issued this summer, raised serious doubts as to whether the knife used to convict Knox had anything to do with the killing. The reanalysis also faulted evidence handling that failed to protect items from potential cross-contamination.
Some of the crime-scene evidence was gathered more than a month after the killing. In the interim, investigators had gone in and out of the apartment, not always wearing protective gear.
Experts say it is all too possible, under such conditions, for a trace of one person to be transferred to another object. Increasingly sensitive DNA testing can pick up these traces, utterly confusing crime analysis — especially in a case such as this, in which four people lived in the apartment and many people came and went.
Grave doubt
The DNA reanalysis did not clearly exonerate Knox and Sollecito, but it cast grave doubt on whether there was any legitimate physical evidence tying them to the crime. Besides, no solid motive had ever been established.
Recognizing this, an Italian appellate panel this week set Knox and Sollecito free. Prosecutors are appealing the decision.
Authorities still believe Guede had accomplices in killing Meredith Kercher. Her family is left to wonder who these people might be and what motivated this terrible crime.
It is not the usual story of DNA analysis, a technology that often brings vital certainty to disputed cases, convicting the guilty and exonerating the innocent.
Indeed, just days ago, two young North Carolina men were cleared of a 2000 killing to which they had pleaded guilty to avoid a possible death sentence. In reconsidering the Asheville area case, a three-judge panel convened by the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission noted that DNA evidence from the crime didn't match the profiles of the two men. They were freed.
The Asheville case provides reassurance that DNA evidence, rigorously collected and preserved, is a blessing for the cause of justice. But when the handling falls short of careful standards — as apparently was the case in the investigation of Kercher's killing — it can be a tragic curse."
-------------------------------------------------------
The story can be found at:
-------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
