Amanda Knox tried for the murder of Meredith Kercher in Italy *NEW TRIAL*#4

[dgfred]

No one can top the conspiracy theory that PM Mignini cooked up for this case.

Do you think that the existence of attorney-client privilege is good in principle?

I think the prosecutorS case was very sound.

Attorney-client privilege doesn't count when you are writing while sitting in jail accused of murder as far as I know. You write a diary in prison... what do you expect?

:jail:

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I am feeling like we are still not getting the whole picture on the DNA. I would love to be able to talk to an unbiased specialist on it, like from a university, for example.

Conti and Vecchiotti are independent experts from a well regarded university. They found many problems with the collection and interpretation of the evidence. However, there are certain aspects of data collection that can be appreciated by a nonexpert, such as the need to change gloves.

 

[Amber29]

I think the prosecutorS case was very sound.

Attorney-client privilege doesn't count when you are writing while sitting in jail accused of murder as far as I know. You write a diary in prison... what do you expect?

:jail:

Yes I agree a letter to your attorney would be one thing but a journal you keep while in prison. There's not much that can be kept a secret in while in jail, doesn't matter what country you live in.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Attorney-client privilege doesn't count when you are writing while sitting in jail accused of murder as far as I know. You write a diary in prison... what do you expect?

:jail:

That's not an answer to my question.

When you hand it to your lawyer (as Raffaele did), it is communication between the two of you; the crime of which you stand accused is not relevant to the question of whether or not there should be a legal privilege.

 

[dgfred]

How did the the guards steal it and give it to Mignini in this 'question'?

But as to your question:
If I am sitting in jail writing about how I pricked the victim with the supposed murder weapon before the murder... but didn't??? I probably deserve to be there.

Regardless, the communication between RS and his lawyer had LE taking the diary before it was communicated so I see no attorney-client problem.

 

[dgfred]

I am shocked a little by this attorney-client view... it is new to me and I was expecting the 'just thinking (writing) out loud some possible NOT-TRUE scenarios' to explain away the incriminating evidence.

 

[SMK]

I often wonder if AK's odd stories are a result of bad coaching from lawyers. Surely they would have advised both of them about how to answer certain questions. I feel as if the bathroom mat boogie thing and the pricking MK with a knife might have been bad legal advice. They just seem so formulated and I'd be surprised if they weren't discussed prior to the trial.

What does everyone else think about this?

Obviously this wouldn't apply to other things said in the interrogation, but I do wonder about some of the things said on the stand.

I had wondered if Sollecito's attorney had asked him, "If you get a chance, try and jot down some ideas that might explain some of what they are saying."

Eureka, Sollecito jots down that he had accidentally pricked MK with a knife and she said this was "not a problem". He shows it to his attorney. And yes, it should have been protected under attorney/client privilege. That is just basic and fundamental when one is awaiting trial. A moot point, though, as the cat was let out of the bag long ago.

So: The question is, Why did Sollecito not simply say, "I have no idea how her dna got on the knife. Maybe Amanda had her over. Ask her." It can only be one of two things: a. He is guilty b. His attorney made him so nervous he spun stories he didn't even need to.

ETA:
So he claimed a couple of months ago via Twitter (his tweet of Sep 22, 2013) that it was from panic attacks. (Were they from knowing he was guilty, or from fearing he was framed? (see bolded below) )

In any case, it was a weird and very suspicious statement to make, but he does not mention his attorney in his tweet at all. So maybe it was NOT covered by attorney/client privilege after all.

Raffaele Sollecito has written a prison diary in which he says the DNA of Meredith Kercher was only on his knife because they had cooked together.

In one entry Sollecito referred to the eight-inch black handled knife, which was found in his apartment, with DNA from Meredith on the tip and Knox's near the handle.

He wrote: "The fact there is Meredith's DNA on the kitchen knife is because once when we were all cooking together I accidentally pricked her hand. I apologised immediately and she said it was not a problem."

However police have spoken to several of Meredith's friends who have all told detectives that Meredith, from Coulsdon, Surrey, had never been to Sollecito's house.

Sollecito also wrote that he may have been framed by Knox.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-DNA-knife-pricked-cooking.html#ixzz2kfRUCI7V

 

[dgfred]

If the attorney did do that and he wrote THAT... I bet the lawyer got light-headed when he first heard about it.

He might should have taken away his pencils and all available writing paper in his cell instead.

He did say he was an anxious person... but jeez. Can't have any smoke in jail I guess.

 

[SMK]

If the attorney did do that and he wrote THAT... I bet the lawyer got light-headed when he first heard about it.

He might should have taken away his pencils and all available writing paper in his cell instead.

He did say he was an anxious person... but jeez. Can't have any smoke in jail I guess.

Yes, that occurred to me that when initially incarcerated, he may have had withdrawal-induced paranoia. This may be what he means by "panic attacks." But it's true, it would surely have been better to offer no explanation at all, then the one he concocted.

 

[Amber29]

I'm sorry but personal journals are used as evidence in many cases.

Who's word do we have that his journal was handled this way and why did RS wait until writing his book to say this? Did RSs lawyers file a complaint that his rights had been violated? I don't recall this but correct me if I'm wrong please.

Here's a case where a husband stole a woman's journal and took photos of her personal journal and they were used as evidence against her
http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2007/...ary-used-against-her-in-court-custody-battle/

 

[SMK]

I'm sorry but personal journals are used as evidence in many cases.

Who's word do we have that his journal was handled this way and why did RS wait until writing his book to say this? Did RSs lawyers file a complaint that his rights had been violated? I don't recall this but correct me if I'm wrong please.

Here's a case where a husband stole a woman's journal and took photos of her personal journal and they were used as evidence against her
http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2007/...ary-used-against-her-in-court-custody-battle/

Yes, I recall also a case of a physician found guilty of murder- not much evidence against him, but his personal diaries were trotted out in court, and used against him, despite protests from his attorney.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

I wrote a comment about the diary and its illegally being confiscated a week or so ago, but apparently it was not noticed. The knife is covered on pages 91-92 in Honor Bound. "I was feeling so panicky that I imagined for a moment that I had used the knife to cook lunch at Via della Pergola...Something like that had in fact happened...My hand slipped and the knife I was using made contact with her skin for the briefest of moments...But of course I wasn't using my own knife at the time." He concludes by saying that there was no connection between the incident and what he had imagined.

On pp. 107-108 he wrote, "I showed Luca Maori a prison diary I'd been keeping so he could assess whether any of it might be useful in court...I agreed he should take to his office for safekeeping." The prison guards ordered Maori to hand it over. Maori called Mignini who instructed the guards to return the diary, but Raffaele believes that pages from the diary were photocopied in the interim. Some of the pages were leaked to La Nazione. The fact that he gave it to Maori with the purpose of possibly helping his defense is what makes it covered by attorney-client privilege IMO. Some things in life are gray. This isn't one of them.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Yes, that occurred to me that when initially incarcerated, he may have had withdrawal-induced paranoia. This may be what he means by "panic attacks." But it's true, it would surely have been better to offer no explanation at all, then the one he concocted.

To whom was he offering an explanation when he wrote the diary? IMO he was trying to grapple with a mystery, and he was doing so during a period in which he had extremely limited contact with his lawyers and family. He was speaking to himself, in other words.

Why people are concerned with what Raffaele said about the knife is a much bigger mystery. Why not examine the knife itself as evidence, which no words can change? The fact that it is low template DNA, the lack of an actual groove, and above all the lack of blood speak forcefully that Stefanoni's result was due to contamination.

 

[Amber29]

I wrote a comment about the diary and its illegally being confiscated a week or so ago, but apparently it was not noticed. The knife is covered on pages 91-92 in Honor Bound. "I was feeling so panicky that I imagined for a moment that I had used the knife to cook lunch at Via della Pergola...Something like that had in fact happened...My hand slipped and the knife I was using made contact with her skin for the briefest of moments...But of course I wasn't using my own knife at the time." He concludes by saying that there was no connection between the incident and what he had imagined.

On pp. 107-108 he wrote, "I showed Luca Maori a prison diary I'd been keeping so he could assess whether any of it might be useful in court...I agreed he should take to his office for safekeeping." The prison guards ordered Maori to hand it over. Maori called Mignini who instructed the guards to return the diary, but Raffaele believes that pages from the diary were photocopied in the interim. Some of the pages were leaked to La Nazione.

Quite the different story than the original and one he had 5 years to perfect for his book.

Again personal journals are used in cases everyday. I linked a story about a woman's who were stolen and photographed. They were accepted as evidence against her and it didn't even happen in Italy.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Does the foresic team that handled this case still have jobs?
It seems they shouldn't if they do everything wrong when it comes to collecting evidence.

If I had been the laboratory supervisor, I would retrain them rather than fire them.

 

[Amber29]

If I had been the laboratory supervisor, I would retrain them rather than fire them.

Why according to you they do nothing correctly.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Quite the different story than the original and one he had 5 years to perfect for his book.

Again personal journals are used in cases everyday. I linked a story about a woman's who were stolen and photographed. They were accepted as evidence against her and it didn't even happen in Italy.

I only quoted a portion of it in the interests of time. I suggest reading the whole passage to get a better flavor of it, as well as his overall mental state. He also discusses the moment when he realized that Amanda could not have left his flat, which came well after his appearance before Judge Matteini. It may help to recall that he was kept in solitary for several months during the year in between Matteini and Micheli. You have to wonder about a system that allows solitary confinement to be used against someone who is not even yet bound for trial, let alone convicted. No wonder he had panic attacks. Sheesh!

The discussion of whether personal journals can or cannot be used is absolutely irrelevant to the issue I raised. And the issue I raised has nothing to do with conspiracy theories, so I have no idea where that notion comes from (I realize that it was not your comment).

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Why according to you they do nothing correctly.

Firing someone is not always easy, and the next people I hired would also have to be trained. Also, it seems from the anonymous letter sent to one of the courts, the problems are at least partially budgetary. I don't have a link to that letter handy, unfortunately.

I formed my opinion by reading articles in the primary and popular forensic literature. Some things are difficult to understand, but this one not so much. Stefanoni's views on how often gloves should be changed are way out of the mainstream. Poy and Van Oorshot wrote, "To further help evaluate the above finding swabs were taken from gloves worn whilst examining a heavily soiled dress during routine casework examination. A significant amount of DNA was retrieved which exhibited a genetic profile that matched that of samples taken from the exhibit." This is direct evidence that gloves can transfer DNA. The advice on this subject from Dick Warrington's articles is quite emphatic. Link here.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Of course not... and I don't think I have implied any inside knowledge.

I go from:

Doesn't have rent money because not paid by Patrick. She said this.

Where did she say that?

 

[otto]

I wrote a comment about the diary and its illegally being confiscated a week or so ago, but apparently it was not noticed. The knife is covered on pages 91-92 in Honor Bound. "I was feeling so panicky that I imagined for a moment that I had used the knife to cook lunch at Via della Pergola...Something like that had in fact happened...My hand slipped and the knife I was using made contact with her skin for the briefest of moments...But of course I wasn't using my own knife at the time." He concludes by saying that there was no connection between the incident and what he had imagined.

On pp. 107-108 he wrote, "I showed Luca Maori a prison diary I'd been keeping so he could assess whether any of it might be useful in court...I agreed he should take to his office for safekeeping." The prison guards ordered Maori to hand it over. Maori called Mignini who instructed the guards to return the diary, but Raffaele believes that pages from the diary were photocopied in the interim. Some of the pages were leaked to La Nazione. The fact that he gave it to Maori with the purpose of possibly helping his defense is what makes it covered by attorney-client privilege IMO. Some things in life are gray. This isn't one of them.

Are you saying that Sollecito has tried to re-write history in his book by pretending that he was talking about a knife at the cottage? Originally, he said that he pricked Meredith with a knife when she had dinner at his apartment.