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

[dgfred]

Can not LE take something away from a prisoner that he has written while in jail?

Here, there and everywhere?

 

[Sonata]

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.

Withdraws $361.54 --- later deposits $562.00

Did not go into work again. Was never paid by Patrick.

Arrested on the evening of the 5th after accusing Patrick of the murder.

I really think the round number for the deposit suggests that it was made in dollars not euros. It just would not end up that way from a conversion. You can see this illustrated in the withdrawal figure, which is the kind of odd amount you expect in a currency conversion.

 

[Amber29]

Well Amanda and RS, seems to me, had a lot more to lose if they admitted to the murder. As far as standing in society/amongst friends and family, their family's position in society, impact on their future careers/success, etc.. They probably had loftier goals in life than Rudy did. Rudy probably wasn't thinking, how am I going to live with a convicted felony on my record, for murder of all things? And let's be honest, no one would have believed any excuse he came up with. There was no way of getting out of it, so he didn't even try. I think it was a combination of these things that led to Fast Track, plus yes, good lawyers for making him shut up and not say something to mess it all up.

Amanda and RS could not take that. It wasn't enough for them to stay quiet, they had to actively proclaim their innocence and get their societal standing back. This makes sense. It's no okay for them for people to think they even could be involved in something like this. It's not just a matter of going to prison or being convicted, it's a matter of they cannot let people see them in that light.

I do agree with your post although one does not have to admit their crime to accept a fast track trial and defendants can still be acquitted in a fast track trial.
It only means your evidence and witnesses presented are limited IIRC

It is not a plea bargain/guilty plea for a lesser sentence.

 

[dgfred]

Yes. It is all US dollars because it was an American account.

 

[Amber29]

Can not LE take something away from a prisoner that he has written while in jail?

Here, there and everywhere?

Yes I'm pretty sure there was evidence used against jodi arias written and confiscated from jail.

 

[Sonata]

Yes. It is all US dollars because it was an American account.

Yes, so for a deposit of $562 in Nov 2007, it would have had to have been a 388.839 euro deposit... that's an awfully strange amount to deposit!

I used OANDA to calculate the historical rate.

 

[dgfred]

Only I don't know if step-dad or CharlieW may have rounded off one figure or the other.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Can not LE take something away from a prisoner that he has written while in jail?

Here, there and everywhere?

Someone (probably the guards) took it from his lawyer, who complained to Mignini. Mignini got the guards to return it, but apparently they made a copy. The fact that Mignini told the guards to return it indicates that confiscating it was a breach.

 

[aa9511]

One, the DNA evidence against Guede is for his lawyers to contest if they think it was collected, interpreted, or documented improperly. What I can say about the DNA forensics against Amanda and Raffaele is that the evidence was collected poorly in several instances, incorrectly interpreted, and undocumented. Again, the release of the electronic data files (which include the negative controls) is a near universal norm, but not in this case. Why not? If the work was done well, what are the authorities so afraid of?

Two, Guede did not live there, but Amanda did; therefore, there any DNA of Guede's found is evidence of his presence in the flat, almost certainly on 1 November (since there is no evidence that he was in the flat on any other day). Amanda's DNA is also evidence that she was in the flat, but she had a period of over a month in which to deposit it.

Three, the DNA evidence against Guede is secondary to the bloody palm print and similar in weight to the bloody shoe prints IMO. In other words it fills out the story, but it is not necessary to convict him. I have previously stated that every bit of evidence collected on 18 December should be at least taken at a discount, and this includes the evidence against Guede, on the basis that it was not collected in a timely manner (citation previously given).

Four, the lack of Amanda's or Raffaele's DNA on Meredith's wrists, etc. does not help the case that they participated in the assault (such as restraining her), especially given that Meredith's sweatshirt had Guede's DNA. There is some information in the literature on DNA transfer in domestic assault that can be read for background.

Five, with respect to gloves, a failure to change gloves can lead to mixed DNA, but it cannot make DNA appear out of thin air. This is one reason among several that the mixed DNA between Amanda and Meredith is not particularly incriminating.

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. I just simply don't know enough about transfer, etc.. And I don't trust myself going to different websites and trying to teach myself, for the main reason of, I won't know who is behind those websites. I have seen many things quoted on here which come from either "pro" or "against" Amanda websites. And I don't like the idea of getting information, frankly, from either of them. Or from some other website where I don't know what the purpose is behind them. Also, there is the matter of, will I be able to correctly understand the information as it's meant to be interpreted?

I don't know how easy or how hard it is to have some DNA in one spot, and have someone's blood fall on that exact spot, resulting in mixed DNA. Just from using my own logic, I find that kind of a strange coincidence. But again, I don't know the general prevalence of someone's DNA in a house where they live. I just don't know. On top of that, how did the blood get there? Someone brought that blood to the bathroom - Meredith didn't apparently go walking around after the stabbing. So if not Amanda's (whose DNA was mixed with hers), then why isn't instead, the DNA of whomever brought the blood over mixed with Meredith's blood? Why is it just Amanda's?

Also, what about mixed DNA from Filomena's room? If we use your logic of having DNA b/c you live there, wouldn't it make more sense that it would be Filomena's DNA mized with Meredith's? Filomena would have touched many things in her own room. There is no explanation for this, IMO.

I agree with you about the wrists, etc..

 

[aa9511]

I do agree with your post although one does not have to admit their crime to accept a fast track trial and defendants can still be acquitted in a fast track trial.
It only means your evidence and witnesses presented are limited IIRC

It is not a plea bargain/guilty plea for a lesser sentence.

Oh ok, thanks. I just think that if they had agreed to a fast-track, it would have made them look guilty, regardless of what the actual law is. Also, it would have been on their permanent record, I presume. And from everything Amanda and RS have said and done, it seems how people perceive them is very timportant to them.

 

[Harmony 2]

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. I just simply don't know enough about transfer, etc.. And I don't trust myself going to different websites and trying to teach myself, for the main reason of, I won't know who is behind those websites. I have seen many things quoted on here which come from either "pro" or "against" Amanda websites. And I don't like the idea of getting information, frankly, from either of them. Or from some other website where I don't know what the purpose is behind them. Also, there is the matter of, will I be able to correctly understand the information as it's meant to be interpreted?

I don't know how easy or how hard it is to have some DNA in one spot, and have someone's blood fall on that exact spot, resulting in mixed DNA. Just from using my own logic, I find that kind of a strange coincidence. But again, I don't know the general prevalence of someone's DNA in a house where they live. I just don't know. On top of that, how did the blood get there? Someone brought that blood to the bathroom - Meredith didn't apparently go walking around after the stabbing. So if not Amanda's (whose DNA was mixed with hers), then why isn't instead, the DNA of whomever brought the blood over mixed with Meredith's blood? Why is it just Amanda's?

Also, what about mixed DNA from Filomena's room? If we use your logic of having DNA b/c you live there, wouldn't it make more sense that it would be Filomena's DNA mized with Meredith's? Filomena would have touched many things in her own room. There is no explanation for this, IMO.

I agree with you about the wrists, etc..

(BBM) responding to bolded text

The explanation is that Filomena's DNA profile was not obtained to compare evidence to. IIRC

 

[dgfred]

Someone (probably the guards) took it from his lawyer, who complained to Mignini. Mignini got the guards to return it, but apparently they made a copy. The fact that Mignini told the guards to return it indicates that confiscating it was a breach.

Oh gosh... another conspiracy thing? What kind of breach?

Probably just returned it to see if he was going to write something else incriminating. Still doesn't mean LE can not take it if they like IMO.

 

[Footwarrior]

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.

Several experts on the subject have commented on the DNA in this case. Once they make a statement that favors Amanda Knox, they are immediately labeled biased and rejected as an independent source.

It's the same thing that has happened with independent investigators like Steve Moore and John Douglas.

 

[miley]

Have you read the Supreme Court reasoning that overturned Hellmann and basically tore his reasoning for disregarding evidence apart?

My post of Hellmann's assessment wasn't meant to be contentious, just offering information from a different prospective to the discussion.
Rudy admits being there, says he and Meredith had a date and claims they had a sexual encounter that night.
so naturally, everyone should decide for themselves what is or isn't reasonable.

 

[otto]

Me too. He is also a rapist and a murderer who got off with far too light a sentence.

I believe he will be eligible for day parole from 2016 onwards. So that's nice for any Italian reading - a rapist and murderer will be walking your streets in the not too distant future.


ETA: and btw, as someone who has to share a continent with Italy, I can't say I'm too impressed with that. Italy's justice system sucks.

There is no evidence that Meredith was raped.

 

[otto]

Believe it or not Guede is eligible for parole next May after only 7 years for rape and murder. Most of the AK <modsnip> see him as just a innocent witness, victim & patsy.

I think that is incorrect:

"Guede's sentence was reduced from 30 to 16 years on appeal meaning he will be eligible for parole in 2016."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/01/opinion/italy-knox-day-one-latza-nadeau/

 

[dgfred]

Several experts on the subject have commented on the DNA in this case. Once they make a statement that favors Amanda Knox, they are immediately labeled biased and rejected as an independent source.

It's the same thing that has happened with independent investigators like Steve Moore and John Douglas.

But the Italian Courts heard experts from both sides and decided the dna evidence was valid. Experts from another country (sided with the accused no less) are usually not really un-biased, or independent.

IMO Mr Moore and Mr Douglas are labeled for what they say... not because of which side they are with.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Oh gosh... another conspiracy thing? What kind of breach?

Probably just returned it to see if he was going to write something else incriminating. Still doesn't mean LE can not take it if they like IMO.

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?

 

[Amber29]

My post of Hellmann's assessment wasn't meant to be contentious, just offering information from a different prospective to the discussion.
Rudy admits being there, says he and Meredith had a date and claims they had a sexual encounter that night.
so naturally, everyone should decide for themselves what is or isn't reasonable.

I was only asking if you had read the cassation reasoning because it does give the other prospective from the courts side. It's based solely on the case file and evidence and not the media/pr spin.

 

[Amber29]

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?

And just what conspiracy theory are we talking about?