This page discusses footprints, shoe prints and stains found on the floor of the cottage. The prosecution didn't attribute these stains to any specific person. They attempted to use these stains to show mixed DNA evidence. This was a very poor attempt by the prosecution.
Bare footprints were found in Amanda's room using luminol. These footprints are seen on the floor plan below as 4-6. The prosecution said in the trial that these footprints were made in blood. As with all of the footprints shown in blue, these footprints were never proven to be made in blood. As I stated on page one, luminol is an investigative tool that can help investigators find blood that has been cleaned up. When applied, luminol glows for a few seconds when it reacts with blood. Luminol also reacts with many other things. Luminol reacts with various household cleaners, different types of soil, rust in tap water, and many other substances. When luminol glows, investigators can pinpoint the area and then test to see if the stain does indeed consist of blood. Stefanoni claimed these stains were never tested for blood, however in July 2009, Stefanoni's notes confirmed the stains were tested with tetramethylbenzidine which is extremely sensitive for blood. All of the stains detected with luminol tested negative for blood.
The footprints were also swabbed and tested for DNA. All of the footprints tested negative for Meredith's DNA.
Footprints 4, 5 and 6 were not made in blood. These footprints all tested negative for Meredith's DNA. All three footprints found in Amanda's room tested positive for Amanda's DNA. This is no surprise. If the entire floor had been tested, Amanda's DNA would have been everywhere. It is completely normal to find Amanda's DNA on the stains on her floor as well as the entire floor in her room. No control tests were done. No other areas of the floor were tested. The footprints in Amanda's room could have been made from one of the many substances that glow using luminol. Her DNA would be all over her room. These three footprints mean absolutely nothing.
Two of the spots detected with luminol were described as shapeless stains. These two stains were not attributed to the foot of any specific person. These two stains are seen as 7 and 8 in Filomena's room on the floor plan above. Shapeless stain 7 showed DNA from Meredith. Shapeless stain 8 showed DNA from Meredith and a very low (LCN) reading for Amanda. The final stain is seen as 9 on the floor plan. This stain was found in the hall. It was said to be a shoe print that showed DNA from Meredith and Amanda. The shoe print was never matched to anyone.
None of the footprints, shoe prints or stains that were detected with luminol were ever proven to be blood.
No footprints or shoe prints were found in the room where Meredith was killed other than the shoe prints of Rudy Guede. Remember from page one that Rudy's prints are clearly made in Meredith's blood. His tread pattern walks right out the front door. All of the footprints and shoe prints made in Meredith's blood belong to Rudy Guede.
The footprints, shoe prints and stains detected with luminol had absolutely nothing to do with Meredith's murder.
Mixed DNA from all occupants of the apartment would have been found all over the residence if any control testing had ever been done. Unfortunately, the investigators didn't perform any control tests. They could have easily checked random areas of the floor for mixed DNA. If DNA was mixed on other areas of the floor then it would be assumed that it would also be found mixed on stains found on the same floor. Control testing was not done, so these questions will never be answered.
The mixed DNA found on the floor in the areas that glowed from luminol is nothing more that the effects of cohabitation. These footprints and stains had nothing to do with the murder of Meredith Kercher.
If you are wondering why no DNA was mentioned from the other two women living in the house, it is because the investigators never checked for it. They were only looking for the DNA of their suspects. There was absolutely no control testing. Amanda and Raffaele were considered guilty from the start. They simply cherry picked the evidence they needed to fit into Mignini's fantasy.
The crime scene video clearly shows poor evidence collection and possible contamination.
The shoe prints in the hallway were photographed and scrubbed off the floor less than twelve hours into the investigation. The luminol testing was done much later on December 18, 2007.
They most likely scrubbed these prints away because they knew that foot traffic would spread the blood around the cottage. This was a very poor procedure. They should have covered the prints to protect them, or at least lifted them onto some medium rather than destroying them. This procedure made any future investigation much more difficult. They also completely trashed the cottage in their initial search. The entire cottage was contaminated long before the luminol tests were completed.
Police forensic biologist Patrizia Stefanoni and other investigators were sloppy in swabbing stains during their evidence collection. They can be seen in the crime scene video swabbing stains without changing their gloves. Stefanoni's rubber glove can be seen making contact with visible blood in the murder room. Her thumb presses down on visible blood. Stefanoni then leaves the murder room and goes to Filomena's room and swabs another stain. She never changes her gloves. Stefanoni more than likely transferred Meredith's DNA to Filomena's room on her glove. With everything that was at stake, you would think that the investigators would have at least changed their gloves. Any evidence collected in this fashion can simply not be trusted.
Page two: You are currently on page two.
*Page two: Details the shoe prints and stains that were not attributed to any specific person by the prosecution. I also discuss evidence collection and contamination.
a website detailing the wrongful conviction of Amanda Knox & Raffaele Sollecito
The Truth About the Footprints, Shoe Prints and Luminol, Page Two