Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#13

[Bill C]

Bill C, do you have the forensic expertise to know if someone stepping on a bloody footprint and/or shoe print with damp or wet feet could then leave faint traces detectable by Luminol on a tile floor?

To be honest, I don't know but follow my reasoning. The footprint probably would be seen with luminol;however, luminol would also detect the pool of blood in which the footprint laid even if cleaned. I would be worried that the reaction to the footprint would be overshadowed by the reaction to the pool of blood. Now, if the footprint wound up half in and half out of the pool after the show skimming the blood in the pool, then yes, I would expect it would be detected by the luminol test. One would expect, however, that that bloody half-footprint would be visible to to the naked eye. Apparently, there were no half-footprints found in this case.

 

[quesarita]

To be honest, I don't know but follow my reasoning. The footprint probably would be seen with luminol;however, luminol would also detect the pool of blood in which the footprint laid even if cleaned. I would be worried that the reaction to the footprint would be overshadowed by the reaction to the pool of blood. Now, if the footprint wound up half in and half out of the pool after the show skimming the blood in the pool, then yes, I would expect it would be detected by the luminol test. One would expect, however, that that bloody half-footprint would be visible to to the naked eye. Apparently, there were no half-footprints found in this case.

There are no luminol photographs of pools of blood. I'm trying to not make things up here. Knowing that there was a bloody footprint on the bath mat, and bloody shoe prints in the hallway, if someone stepped only on those bloody areas that we know were there, could they have left traces of their footprints visible to Luminol from those points? Am I making sense?

 

[otto]

There are no luminol photographs of pools of blood. I'm trying to not make things up here. Knowing that there was a bloody footprint on the bath mat, and bloody shoe prints in the hallway, if someone stepped only on those bloody areas that we know were there, could they have left traces of their footprints visible to Luminol from those points? Am I making sense?

After reading about about TMB and Luminol last week, my understanding is that Luminol is used as a crime scene reconstruction tool. That is, it's not used to determine whether something is blood, but to identify how people moved through the crime scene. I would think that is the reason that it was not used in the bedroom. If Luminol had been used in the bedroom, it might have been possible to see prints from the blood pools to the bedroom door, but how would that add to an understanding about the murder?

 

[quesarita]

After reading about about TMB and Luminol last week, my understanding is that Luminol is used as a crime scene reconstruction tool. That is, it's not used to determine whether something is blood, but to identify how people moved through the crime scene. I would think that is the reason that it was not used in the bedroom. If Luminol had been used in the bedroom, it might have been possible to see prints from the blood pools to the bedroom door, but how would that add to an understanding about the murder?

Really? IMO it would VASTLY improve the prosecution's contention that someone other than Guede was in the bedroom during or after the murder; and/or it would clearly indicate that a clean-up had happened; and/or it might have identified how people moved through the crime scene so that would not have be left up to our imaginations.

 

[aa9511]

She also talks about "imaginings" and "flashback"

LOL! Oh, yeah that's right. So let's add two more:

"I might be just imagining things."
"Everything feels like it's not real - just a flashback."

And,

"I have an overactive imagination."

 

[aa9511]

SMK if your strong intuition pulls you toward believing they were involved and my strong intuition pulls me toward believing they were not involved does that mean our intuitions get cancelled out.

I am just kidding...

I love the emoticon with the pink bows....Harmony, I'm seeing it in the Quote as a photobucket - does that mean it's not in the site Emoticon list?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Since he uses past tense, such as a woman that "wanted" fame, we have to look to women that Sollecito has known in his past life and who wanted fame. Up until the murder, Sollecito had no fame, so the woman with the fame by association objective (text complaint from Sollecito) came after the murder. Since Sollecito became part of the Kercher murder, Knox is associated with him. Is she a mentally unstable fame seeker?



She and her family drew attention to themselves with clothing (oversized Beattles t-shirt, hotpants) and courtroom attitude. Posing at the scene of the crime was perceived in poor taste. Knox's family gained fame while she lost hair in prison. The US media (PR Firm) provided a skewed interpretation of the trial and Knox gained fame, celebrity and notoriety as a wrongfullyconvicted.com InjusticeinPerugia inspiration. That was somewhat corrected with the English translation of the Massei Report, but the fame seeking was very apparent .. murdertainment that Nancy Grace won't touch.



Did Knox seek fame through her association with the murder of Meredith Kercher? Yes. She still does. Meredith was murdered in 2007, and the family has been clear, throughout, that they do not want any association with the accuseds. Knox, in 2013, is still making demands and requests that Meredith's family associate with her, the accused. She refuses to respect the most basic of requests for privacy. Yes, if six years after the murder the suspect is making a spectacle of herself as she continues to attempt to contact the victim's family and visit the victim's grave, due to a deranged mind or fame as the guiding factor; like with Knox, fame can be the only option. If Knox, the accused, is continuing to attempt to contact the victim's family six years after the murder, something is wrong ... and it's not because the accused is innocent. Each time she surfaces with this request, she gets media attention and fame.

Her repeated attempts to infiltrate Meredith's family with her nonsense reminds me so much of the letter Jodi Arias wrote to Travis's grandmother.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[aa9511]

Yes, the hazy memory thing does in fact sometimes seem like so much strategic manouvering.

About the other point you made in your prior post, too (about talking to the police in an attempt to control the investigation):

I do recall a real-life cold case where a woman and her boyfriend had killed her husband, and went on to lead their separate lives for over 20 years. Then one day the cold case unit came knocking, and the detective told the journalists that the woman could have easily slammed the door in his face, said , "That was decades ago and I've nothing to say; speak to my attorney." He was in fact expecting her to do that, and for the case to remain forever cold. .... But because she thought she could manipulate and put an end to the whole thing, she talked to them for hours, and wound up getting arrested. So yes, that is an example of the point you made.

Wow!

I don't think it's so much of a control thing, though, with these killers - I think it's because they think that it's a combination of: by cooperating, the police won't suspect them "at all" or "as much" AND if they refuse to talk, the police will start suspecting or suspect them more.

If I did something, I sure wouldn't want to be telling the police "go away and get lost." JMO. Even though that is the smart thing to do in the long-run (for the guilty perp), but you know, their main goal is to avoid getting caught in the first place.

That is really interesting about that example you gave...wow.

I would assume that a killer who has not getting caught will spend the rest of their lives looking over their shoulder. I don't think they would ever feel FULL relief. I believe there would always be that kind of, jumpy feeling for the rest of their lives.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Do you think it's acceptable for college kids or any tourist in a foreign country to spend up to 6 years in jail all for signing a false witness statement in the middle of the night in a foreign language they didn't speak well without a lawyer present?



I don't. That's appalling any civilized country would allow that to happen.

She wasn't a child.
She was a grown woman that chose to lie and finger an innocent man.
I ask myself why oh why would an innocent woman be so quick to do that? Because she wanted to deflect blame away from herself.
It's the same reason the grown woman chose to utilize a bathroom to blowdry her hair, next to a toilet full of poop....She noticed it, but didn't bother flush it. Again ...I ask myself why?
Because it puts someone other than herself there. That's why the hallway blood was cleaned up. Thats why I believe the "break in" was staged and it explains why glass was found ontop of clothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[aa9511]

To be honest, I don't know but follow my reasoning. The footprint probably would be seen with luminol;however, luminol would also detect the pool of blood in which the footprint laid even if cleaned. I would be worried that the reaction to the footprint would be overshadowed by the reaction to the pool of blood. Now, if the footprint wound up half in and half out of the pool after the show skimming the blood in the pool, then yes, I would expect it would be detected by the luminol test. One would expect, however, that that bloody half-footprint would be visible to to the naked eye. Apparently, there were no half-footprints found in this case.

But there was no pool of blood in the hallway.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Of course, because they knew she was lying! Any guilty person will of course say "I Don't Remember." It should be enscribed on a plaque and hung in every interrogation room. Of course, the "details", you know very minute minute, hard to remember details like, "what did you do that night?" are going to be verrrrryyyy hard to remember for someone who actually killed someone on the night in question. They weren't asking her, "tell me what you did on January 15, 1986."



It is very convenenient for both Amanda and RS to claim they were in some "haze" to where they couldn't remember basic things they did. Yeah, some haze, that should also be on the plaque: "I was in a blurry haze."



Let's see what plaques there should be:



"I don't remember."

"My memories are fuzzy."

"It's all a blur."

"I was in a fog."

"I was in a haze."

"Everything just blends together. I don't remember."

"I just can't remember."

"Maybe I was dreaming?"

"Maybe I was sleep-walking?"

Another "Fog"...
Gee...another Arias similarity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[otto]

Really? IMO it would VASTLY improve the prosecution's contention that someone other than Guede was in the bedroom during or after the murder; and/or it would clearly indicate that a clean-up had happened; and/or it might have identified how people moved through the crime scene so that would not have be left up to our imaginations.

We have bloody barefoot prints in the hallway belonging to Knox, and in the small bathroom belonging to Sollecito. We have bloody shoe prints in the hallway belonging to Guede. We know that the only source for those prints is in the bedroom, so we know that those three people were in the bedroom at some point after the murder.

We can see that Sollecito and Knox were barefoot and Guede wore shoes. Guede left the bedroom and headed towards the exit, with his prints becoming more faint as he approached the exit. It looks like Knox locked the bedroom door because her prints suggest that she was standing in front of the door. Sollecito flew around the cottage, as there's only a 3/4 print on the bathmat. The evidence that is available seems to explain who fled the scene and who wandered around barefoot. It seems sufficient to conclude that there was a partial clean up, as there's no other explanation for Sollecito's 3/4 print on the edge of the bathmat.

I think there is enough information to draw conclusions, and that luminol in the bedroom would not add anything more than what is already known about the movements of the three accused.

 

[aa9511]

Her repeated attempts to infiltrate Meredith's family with her nonsense reminds me do much if the letter Jodi Arias wrote to Travis's grandmother.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, it's very odd. Especially so many years down the line, still continuiing. I doubt even Jodi writes to Travis' family anymore.

I'm trying to think of the reasons in the guilty scenario:

1. Trying to appear innocent by acting like she cares about the family.
2. Trying to somehow really convince the family that she had no part in it.
3. Maybe she feels like if they meet with her, she can actually change their minds.
4. FOr publicity.
5. Maybe she really does feel remorse, and wants to just talk to the family.

I would be interested to hear someone's take on why continued attempts to contact the family from an innocent scenario.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Really? IMO it would VASTLY improve the prosecution's contention that someone other than Guede was in the bedroom during or after the murder; and/or it would clearly indicate that a clean-up had happened; and/or it might have identified how people moved through the crime scene so that would not have be left up to our imaginations.

The moving of Meredith's body proves to me at least it couldn't have been Rudy alone, as he left rather swiftly...straight out the door. He would have no reason to move her. He didn't go wash up in the bathroom first. But IMO Amanda sure did.she used that bathroom to clean up herself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bill C]

But there was no pool of blood in the hallway.

I think Quesarita's question referred to the earlier discussion of why luminol was not used in the murder room where there definitely were pools of blood, thus my answer. However, I could be mistaken. Quesarita, help us out here!

 

[aa9511]

Also, can anyone tell me if Raffaele has ever attempted to contact the family or have the family contact him? Or expressed the desire to do so. TIA.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Yes, it's very odd. Especially so many years down the line, still continuiing. I doubt even Jodi writes to Travis' family anymore.



I'm trying to think of the reasons in the guilty scenario:



1. Trying to appear innocent by acting like she cares about the family.

2. Trying to somehow really convince the family that she had no part in it.

3. Maybe she feels like if they meet with her, she can actually change their minds.

4. FOr publicity.

5. Maybe she really does feel remorse, and wants to just talk to the family.



I would be interested to hear someone's take on why continued attempts to contact the family from an innocent scenario.

I think RS said it best. He said she doesn't live in reality and lives for pleasure.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[quesarita]

I think Quesarita's question referred to the earlier discussion of why luminol was not used in the murder room where there definitely were pools of blood, thus my answer. However, I could be mistaken. Quesarita, help us out here!

What I am saying, is that because Meredith's blood was found OUTSIDE the bedroom, on the hall floor and bath mat, we cannot KNOW that the footprints were caused by someone stepping in blood in the bedroom.

It is not enough to say that there must have been matching footprints in the bedroom because not only were none found, they weren't even looked for.

 

[Linda7NJ]

What I am saying, is that because Meredith's blood was found OUTSIDE the bedroom, on the hall floor and bath mat, we cannot KNOW that the footprints were caused by someone stepping in blood in the bedroom.



It is not enough to say that there must have been matching footprints in the bedroom because not only were none found, they weren't even looked for.

How would you account for it? How do you propose it got there?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[quesarita]

How would you account for it? How do you propose it got there?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

By someone stepping on the bloody bath mat and or Rudy's shoe prints with wet feet and picking up only enough residual heme (?) to leave traces on the floor detectable only with Luminol.