Amanda Knox found guilty for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy #15

[otto]

I don't think the last statement is accurate... can you link to a court document that states that? tia

The Massei Report contains the complete discussion of instances where Knox and Meredith blood/DNA is mixed. One sample is in Filomina's bedroom, which I posted yesterday with quotes from the report. The bathroom also contains mixed samples.

 

[otto]

According to that link, it was not Amanda's blood mixed with Meredith's blood. It was Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith's blood.

If Knox's DNA is mixed with Meredith's blood in Filomina's bedroom, does that mean that Knox was not involved in the murder?

 

[Jessica2012]

According to that link, it was not Amanda's blood mixed with Meredith's blood. It was Amanda's DNA mixed with Meredith's blood.

I put the wrong link sorry about that, thank You for pointing that out. This is the link I meant to paste.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...e_seemingly_insuperable_mixed_blood_evidence/

 

[Jessica2012]

The Massei Report contains the complete discussion of instances where Knox and Meredith blood/DNA is mixed. One sample is in Filomina's bedroom, which I posted yesterday with quotes from the report. The bathroom also contains mixed samples.

Thank You SO much Otto

 

[TorisMom003]

I put the wrong link sorry about that, you are right, I misunderstood Thank You for pointing that out. This is the link I meant to paste.

http://truejustice.org/ee/index.php...e_seemingly_insuperable_mixed_blood_evidence/

I'm curious as to why that link uses excerpts from books and articles instead of actual trial testimony to prove that there was numerous spots of Amanda's BLOOD mixed with Meredith's blood.

 

[TorisMom003]

If Knox's DNA is mixed with Meredith's blood in Filomina's bedroom, does that mean that Knox was not involved in the murder?

It means that it proves nothing either way. There is no test that can be done to see how long someone's DNA has been in a spot before the blood of someone else came into contact with it.

 

[Yellow]

There is a USA today article now blasting the judge noting that he told the media that RS could well have avoided punishment if he pinned it on AK, that the evidence was so strong against her,

Um...what about the truth? I just hope this judge keeps on talking bc it will just do more to underscore how predetermined this judgement was...the USA today article cites ordinary Italians too complaining

 

[TorisMom003]

There is a USA today article now blasting the judge noting that he told the media that RS could well have avoided punishment if he pinned it on AK, that the evidence was so strong against her,

Um...what about the truth? I just hope this judge keeps on talking bc it will just do more to underscore how predetermined this judgement was...the USA today article cites ordinary Italians too complaining

Link for the article

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/03/amanda-knox-judge/5183469/

 

[aa9511]

There is a USA today article now blasting the judge noting that he told the media that RS could well have avoided punishment if he pinned it on AK, that the evidence was so strong against her,

Um...what about the truth? I just hope this judge keeps on talking bc it will just do more to underscore how predetermined this judgement was...the USA today article cites ordinary Italians too complaining

The judge did not state that RS could have avoided punishment if he had pinned it on Amanda. That is misleading and a complete misrepresentation.

He did say that RS chose not to speak, which was his right, but that by not doing so, it deprived the process of a voice. Of course, in any case, more information can be learned if the defendant chooses to testify. That is true of any case anywhere. However, in many cases the defendant does not choose to testify, and that is their right.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/eu...tended-flee/cIpsjZSSY5uiKLpNJkJB6J/story.html

But on a separate note, do you not agree that there was more evidence found against Amanda than against RS? That is just the facts in the case. Amanda had more forensic evidence found against her. And she also would have been the only one out of the 3 who could have given access to the cottage, since she was the one who lived there.

 

[TorisMom003]

The judge did not state that RS could have avoided punishment if he had pinned it on Amanda. That is misleading and a complete misrepresentation.

He did say that RS chose not to speak, which was his right, but that by not doing so, it deprived the process of a voice. Of course, in any case, more information can be learned if the defendant chooses to testify. That is true of any case anywhere. However, in many cases the defendant does not choose to testify, and that is their right.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/eu...tended-flee/cIpsjZSSY5uiKLpNJkJB6J/story.html

But on a separate note, do you not agree that there was more evidence found against Amanda than against RS? That is just the facts in the case. Amanda had more forensic evidence found against her. And she also would have been the only one out of the 3 who could have given access to the cottage, since she was the one who lived there.

Actually we do not know for sure exactly what all the judge stated to the press. One reporter printed some of what the judge said, but it is doubtful that it was all of what the judge said. There is an article that the link to has been posted that states the judge also made the other comment about RS and turning on Amanda. Until there is video from the time that the judge made the comments to the media, then we do not know exactly what the judge said.

 

[Madeleine74]

The judge did not state that RS could have avoided punishment if he had pinned it on Amanda. That is misleading and a complete misrepresentation.

Which is exactly why using media reports to argue a case is not a good idea. It's also why media reports about a case and evidence are not considered evidence.

 

[Myvice]

Link for the article

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/03/amanda-knox-judge/5183469/

I don't think I've ever seen a more misleading title, LOL.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

There is a USA today article now blasting the judge noting that he told the media that RS could well have avoided punishment if he pinned it on AK, that the evidence was so strong against her,

Um...what about the truth? I just hope this judge keeps on talking bc it will just do more to underscore how predetermined this judgement was...the USA today article cites ordinary Italians too complaining

:twocents:

I think it is a "low blow" for the U.S. media to continue to attack the Italian System of Justice as well as its Judges because THEY -- the media -- do not like the way the law works over there -- OR -- they think that Knox is "innocent" -- which she is NOT if you look at the TOTALITY of the evidence against Knox, Raf and Rudy ...

This is not Judge Nencini "first rodeo" ... he is a well respected judge and did an outstanding job during this latest Appeal ...


BBM: I am confused by the term used "ordinary Italians" :

Was this term used in the article ?

Does it refer to Italians in Italy, or, Americans who are of Italian descent ?


:moo:

 

[TorisMom003]

I don't think I've ever seen a more misleading title, LOL.

Considering the following is part of the article, I don't.

"Lawyers for Knox and Sollecito blasted Nencini for his remarks, as did the Italian press."

 

[miley]

I'm curious as to why that link uses excerpts from books and articles instead of actual trial testimony to prove that there was numerous spots of Amanda's BLOOD mixed with Meredith's blood.

remember all of the luminol prints tested negative for blood including the trace found in F's room

You can also find it here supported with trial testimony
http://murderofmeredithkercher.com/the-other-dna-evidence/
Scroll down and read: The Truth About The Luminol Prints That Tested Negative For Blood

At the beginning of the page, "The Other DNA Evidence" explains the traces found on the sink.

 

[Myvice]

Considering the following is part of the article, I don't.

"Lawyers for Knox and Sollecito blasted Nencini for his remarks, as did the Italian press."

The title states that the judge says RS could have gotten off by turning against AK. I sure don't see that in there. Could you quote that part please?

 

[aa9511]

Actually we do not know for sure exactly what all the judge stated to the press. One reporter printed some of what the judge said, but it is doubtful that it was all of what the judge said. There is an article that the link to has been posted that states the judge also made the other comment about RS and turning on Amanda. Until there is video from the time that the judge made the comments to the media, then we do not know exactly what the judge said.

What I see in the USA article is the author states that Judge Nencini "suggested" what you said. And in the Boston article I linked to, it states in quotes what Judge Nencini actually said, which I think is where the original statement was from which the USA author extrapolated his interpretation of. In other words, he thinks that that is what the Judge suggested. It is the author's opinion.

In the second instance in the USA article where the author speaks of pinning it on Amanda, he states that Judge Nencini told Italian journalists, but never gives anything in quotes, and does not even state exactly where he got the information from - meaning which journalists or which media interview Nencini.

So I would therefore call the USA Today article an opinion piece. Was it found in the opinion section of the paper?

The author Eric J. Lyman did terrible reporting in regards to this piece.

Here is the link, so posters are not mislead and can see exactly the kind of reporting Mr. Lyman did:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/03/amanda-knox-judge/5183469/

 

[TorisMom003]

The title states that the judge says RS could have gotten off by turning against AK. I sure don't see that in there. Could you quote that part please?

"But Judge Alessandro Nencini broke with protocol this weekend, telling Italian journalists that the case against Knox was strong enough that former boyfriend Raffaelle Sollecito would have helped his chances to avoid jail time by trying to lay all the blame on Knox."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/03/amanda-knox-judge/5183469/

The title of the piece is "Italian judge blasted in Knox case"

 

[aa9511]

Which is exactly why using media reports to argue a case is not a good idea. It's also why media reports about a case and evidence are not considered evidence.

Excuse me, but I am not the one who originally brought up this Nencini issue in the first place. I was just responding to clarify very misleading comments, and a reporter's own opinion tried to be passed off as fact.

 

[aa9511]

"But Judge Alessandro Nencini broke with protocol this weekend, telling Italian journalists that the case against Knox was strong enough that former boyfriend Raffaelle Sollecito would have helped his chances to avoid jail time by trying to lay all the blame on Knox."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/03/amanda-knox-judge/5183469/

The title of the piece is "Italian judge blasted in Knox case"

Mr. Lyman never states where he got this information. He also does not state Judge Nencini's own words. He simply states something as fact which has absolutely no corroboration. Terrible reporting.