Meredith Kercher murdered - Amanda Knox convicted, now appeals #5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Salem

Former Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
29,154
Reaction score
204
I'm opening a new thread so everyone can discuss the Court's recent DNA decisions.

Please - remember to treat each other respectfully. Please review your post before hitting send to double check that if someone, unfamiliar with the case were to come to the thread, they would understand your point, would not feel like the thread belongs to just a few posters and would feel very comfortable jumping in the discussion.

There is bound to be some frustration between the two opposing sides, that's okay as long as that frustration does not come out as baiting or attacking or as a refusal to accept the other side has a different opinion, based on their own interpretation of the facts of the case. Remember, it is NOT your job to convince the other side that your theory is the only correct one.

Okay - please continue here. I am looking forward to this discussion. I will let all of you find the links and recent news stories.

Salem

Previous Threads

Thread 4 - to be added after review.

Thread 3

Thread 2

Thread 1
 
The independent experts asked that they be able to remove the handle of the knife to look for blood/DNA. Neither the defense for Amanda nor Raffaele objected to this. Hellman has ruled that the handle only be removed if deemed absolutely necessary. The prosecution and lawyer for Meredith did, however, object to the removal of the handle for additional testing.

http://www.umbria24.it/omicidio-mer...tello-va-aperto-per-vederci-chiaro/16995.html

http://www.adnkronos.com/IGN/News/C...-a-periti-per-esame-del-dna_311578772183.html
 
Malkmus said:
The independent experts asked that they be able to remove the handle of the knife to look for blood/DNA. Neither the defense for Amanda nor Raffaele objected to this. Hellman has ruled that the handle only be removed if deemed absolutely necessary. The prosecution and lawyer for Meredith did, however, object to the removal of the handle for additional testing.

http://www.umbria24.it/omicidio-mer...tello-va-aperto-per-vederci-chiaro/16995.html

http://www.adnkronos.com/IGN/News/C...-a-periti-per-esame-del-dna_311578772183.html
Click to expand...

:wagon: :welcome: :welcome4:
 
Malkmus said:
The independent experts asked that they be able to remove the handle of the knife to look for blood/DNA. Neither the defense for Amanda nor Raffaele objected to this. Hellman has ruled that the handle only be removed if deemed absolutely necessary. The prosecution and lawyer for Meredith did, however, object to the removal of the handle for additional testing.

http://www.umbria24.it/omicidio-mer...tello-va-aperto-per-vederci-chiaro/16995.html

http://www.adnkronos.com/IGN/News/C...-a-periti-per-esame-del-dna_311578772183.html
Click to expand...

Yes, welcome and thank you!

I wonder why the prosecution and MK's lawyer are objecting to the removal of the handle...

I've minced no words in expressing my belief that this knife is one of the weaker elements of the prosecutor's case. I just don't see AK or RS deciding to carry an unwieldy kitchen knife out for the evening "just for fun".
 
The prosecution and lawyer for Meredith did, however, object to the removal of the handle for additional testing.
Click to expand...

I wonder what they're afraid of? It's a logical request. Every single part of that knife should be tested, especially if they are saying that was the murder weapon.
 
Nova said:
I've minced no words in expressing my belief that this knife is one of the weaker elements of the prosecutor's case. I just don't see AK or RS deciding to carry an unwieldy kitchen knife out for the evening "just for fun".
Click to expand...

I agree that it makes no sense for either RS or AK to carry an 8" kitchen knife out with them. RS had his own knife collection, including at least one folding knife. Why walk around with a kitchen knife? For what purpose? Even the judge in his report thought the murder was not premeditated -- he believed the sex game gone wrong B.S.

But yet, this kitchen knife is supposedly the murder weapon? I am highly suspicious of it and the testing that was done on it.
 
SleuthyGal said:
I agree that it makes no sense for either RS or AK to carry an 8" kitchen knife out with them. RS had his own knife collection, including at least one folding knife. Why walk around with a kitchen knife? For what purpose? Even the judge in his report thought the murder was not premeditated -- he believed the sex game gone wrong B.S.

But yet, this kitchen knife is supposedly the murder weapon? I am highly suspicious of it and the testing that was done on it.
Click to expand...

That's precisely my reasoning. Carrying an 8" kitchen knife around is far more likely to end in the knife's owner being cut than anyone else. And that is assuming no premeditation.

If one takes the opposite tack and presumes premeditation, then it makes no sense to bring a weapon that is so difficult to conceal.

All in all and IMHO, it takes a huge leap to believe that kitchen knife is one of the murder weapons. Even if they CAN find MK's DNA on it, I'd sooner believe contamination of some sort than that AK carried that knife to her house as a toy.

(The only other thing I might believe is that AK borrowed the knife *IF AND ONLY IF* the girls had no kitchen knives of their own; but I have heard no testimony to that effect.)
 
Nova said:
That's precisely my reasoning. Carrying an 8" kitchen knife around is far more likely to end in the knife's owner being cut than anyone else. And that is assuming no premeditation.

If one takes the opposite tack and presumes premeditation, then it makes no sense to bring a weapon that is so difficult to conceal.

All in all and IMHO, it takes a huge leap to believe that kitchen knife is one of the murder weapons. Even if they CAN find MK's DNA on it, I'd sooner believe contamination of some sort than that AK carried that knife to her house as a toy.

(The only other thing I might believe is that AK borrowed the knife *IF AND ONLY IF* the girls had no kitchen knives of their own; but I have heard no testimony to that effect.)
Click to expand...

minor correction ... but ... According to the motivation report the knife, in total length, was 31 cm; which is equivalent to 12.2".

"a large knife of point and blade comprising in total a length of 31 cm (seized at SOLLECITO’s on November 6, 2007, Exhibit 36)"

Ref: pg 11; Motivation Report
 
otto said:
minor correction ... but ... According to the motivation report the knife, in total length, was 31 cm; which is equivalent to 12.2".

"a large knife of point and blade comprising in total a length of 31 cm (seized at SOLLECITO’s on November 6, 2007, Exhibit 36)"

Ref: pg 11; Motivation Report
Click to expand...

Thanks. And that's hardly a minor correction, since it makes my point even stronger (i.e., a foot-long knife is even more difficult to handle safely and conceal).

But is it possible we're talking about an 8" blade with a 3 or 4" handle? That sounds like a steak knife to me (though I'm no expert on kitchenware).

In any event, good to see you here, my friend. I missed you and the whole "gang" during the hiatus.

Query: IIRC, you felt retesting the knife evidence could only help RS, not AK. Do you want to repeat your reasoning on that? I think I had a couple of questions, but I don't want to summarize your argument for fear of getting it wrong.
 
Nova said:
Thanks. And that's hardly a minor correction, since it makes my point even stronger (i.e., a foot-long knife is even more difficult to handle safely and conceal).

But is it possible we're talking about an 8" blade with a 3 or 4" handle? That sounds like a steak knife to me (though I'm no expert on kitchenware).

In any event, good to see you here, my friend. I missed you and the whole "gang" during the hiatus.

Query: IIRC, you felt retesting the knife evidence could only help RS, not AK. Do you want to repeat your reasoning on that? I think I had a couple of questions, but I don't want to summarize your argument for fear of getting it wrong.
Click to expand...

Indeed ... always interesting to follow the case updates. What do you make of the handle testing?

I think you're referring to a post where I said it the other way around. I said that re-testing the knife helped Amanda and retesting the bra clasp helped Raffaele ... but that DNA implicating each of them was being retested.
 
Yeah a 12 inch knife being carried around is not very plausible. There was no reason for it to be carried around outside. As such, I find it highly convenient that this knife was pulled out of the kitchen drawer (or wherever it was), at random, and happened to have a tiny bit of MK and AK DNA on it.

As SNL's church lady (played by Dana Carvey) would say, "Well isn't that con-veeeeeeeeeeeen-yent!"
 
If the bra clasp DNA and the knife DNA can be successfully challenged, then that effectively removes the most damaging physical evidence against each defendant in the appeal. It doesn't remove all the physical evidence, but minimizing or even discarding those 2 items may well be enough to create reasonable doubt and a reversal of the sentence.
 
Thanks for the warm welcome, guys. Yes, Massei's conclusion that Amanda was carrying the knife around in her purse for protection is ridiculous for many reasons. But even if you can imagine a girl carrying a large kitchen knife around it makes little to no sense when we know that Amanda was already carrying mace spray and that there would be no need to borrow Raffaele's one big knife when the cottage she shared had a relative armory of similar knives at her disposal. I've noticed that most people who believe she is guilty don't even buy into Massei's theory and prefer to believe it was actually premeditated. Though that requires motive, of which there was none.

The knife retesting will be interesting. It was never fair during the first trial considering that the prosecution denied the defense access to the electronic data files. And this latest "objection" to opening the handle while the defense is leaning back saying "go ahead" is very telling.
 
otto said:
Indeed ... always interesting to follow the case updates. What do you make of the handle testing?

I think you're referring to a post where I said it the other way around. I said that re-testing the knife helped Amanda and retesting the bra clasp helped Raffaele ... but that DNA implicating each of them was being retested.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were saying the knife DNA hurts RS because it puts MK's DNA at his house where she had never been; therefore, if that DNA is disallowed, it can only help RS. To me, if the knife DNA is lost, it helps both AK and RS, since both were at the apartment that night and yet we have not a single speck of MK's DNA transferred from the bloody murder scene. And at least we put aside the specter of either or both of them running around town with a foot-long knife in hand. Not absolute proof of innocence, obviously, but better than a claim that puts the victim's DNA on a knife in an apartment she had never visited.

The bra clasp is only slightly more convincing to me than the knife DNA. I think it was invented (perhaps with good intentions) long after the fact to fit the prosecutor's "sex games gone mad" theory. Even if the DNA is retested and shown to belong to RS, how can retesting prove or disprove whether there was contamination?
 
SleuthyGal said:
Yeah a 12 inch knife being carried around is not very plausible. There was no reason for it to be carried around outside. As such, I find it highly convenient that this knife was pulled out of the kitchen drawer (or wherever it was), at random, and happened to have a tiny bit of MK and AK DNA on it.

As SNL's church lady (played by Dana Carvey) would say, "Well isn't that con-veeeeeeeeeeeen-yent!"
Click to expand...

IIRC (and I'm depending on otto, I think for this info), the claim was that that particular knife was shinier than the others, probably because it had been cleaned with bleach to hide the blood stains.

For all the other reasons we've listed, I find this no more convincing.
 
Malkmus said:
Thanks for the warm welcome, guys. Yes, Massei's conclusion that Amanda was carrying the knife around in her purse for protection is ridiculous for many reasons. But even if you can imagine a girl carrying a large kitchen knife around it makes little to no sense when we know that Amanda was already carrying mace spray and that there would be no need to borrow Raffaele's one big knife when the cottage she shared had a relative armory of similar knives at her disposal. I've noticed that most people who believe she is guilty don't even buy into Massei's theory and prefer to believe it was actually premeditated. Though that requires motive, of which there was none.

The knife retesting will be interesting. It was never fair during the first trial considering that the prosecution denied the defense access to the electronic data files. And this latest "objection" to opening the handle while the defense is leaning back saying "go ahead" is very telling.
Click to expand...

Are you able to read the Italian in your links? Did the prosecution give any reason for their protest?

For all I know there is a good reason why they don't want the handle removed for retesting, but I am tempted to conclude they simply want the Court to imagine there some unseen quantity of MK's blood hidden in the handle.
 
SleuthyGal said:
If the bra clasp DNA and the knife DNA can be successfully challenged, then that effectively removes the most damaging physical evidence against each defendant in the appeal. It doesn't remove all the physical evidence, but minimizing or even discarding those 2 items may well be enough to create reasonable doubt and a reversal of the sentence.
Click to expand...

It might well prove enough for me.

This was a bloody murder. If AK and RS were present, there should be artifacts from the crime on their persons, clothes and/or possessions, and their DNA on objects in the murder room.

If you remove the knife and bra clasp, there is none. Which should give everyone reasonable doubt as to whether they were present for the rape and murder.

And if they weren't, then what, exactly, are they guilty of doing? Opening a door to an acquaintance with no history of violent crime? Introducing one acquaintance to another?

Maybe there is still a way to make a case that AK and RS were accomplices, but without the knife and bra clasp, I don't see how you connect them directly to the murder and rape.
 
SleuthyGal said:
If the bra clasp DNA and the knife DNA can be successfully challenged, then that effectively removes the most damaging physical evidence against each defendant in the appeal. It doesn't remove all the physical evidence, but minimizing or even discarding those 2 items may well be enough to create reasonable doubt and a reversal of the sentence.
Click to expand...

It's my understanding that if evidence on the knife, bra clasp and witness testimony returns with a different conclusion than before, then additional evidence will be reviewed.
 
Malkmus said:
Thanks for the warm welcome, guys. Yes, Massei's conclusion that Amanda was carrying the knife around in her purse for protection is ridiculous for many reasons. But even if you can imagine a girl carrying a large kitchen knife around it makes little to no sense when we know that Amanda was already carrying mace spray and that there would be no need to borrow Raffaele's one big knife when the cottage she shared had a relative armory of similar knives at her disposal. I've noticed that most people who believe she is guilty don't even buy into Massei's theory and prefer to believe it was actually premeditated. Though that requires motive, of which there was none.

The knife retesting will be interesting. It was never fair during the first trial considering that the prosecution denied the defense access to the electronic data files. And this latest "objection" to opening the handle while the defense is leaning back saying "go ahead" is very telling.
Click to expand...

What electronic data files were not available to the defence? Do you have a media link ... or is this about the computer that was fried during examination?

What would examining the handle add to the evidence? The DNA was found on the blade of the knife, and from my understanding it was not close to the handle. Suppose there is no additional DNA under the handle, does that negate the DNA on the blade?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 150 more.
Total: 428 (members: 151, guests: 277)

Online statistics

Members online
151
Guests online
277
Total visitors
428
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,304
Messages
18,252,455
Members
234,611
Latest member
BSPEN
Back
Top