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

[Chris_Halkides]

The link provided only shows Johnson's and Hampikian's signature. The link did not include the one-paragraph appendix to the open letter which was co-signed by seven additional experts in the forensic DNA field, including Dan Krane and Jason Gilder.

From the link I provided: "Joy Halverson and Marc Taylor have confirmed that they signed the appendix to the open letter. Marc Taylor wrote, 'We have discovered numerous manipulations of the data analysis or the actual physical analysis of the evidence by reviewing the electronic data…The electronic data is clearly the ‘best evidence’ in the legal system.'" I have corresponded with several of the co-signers. Not one has ever said that they disagreed with the contents of the letter or the appendix. If anyone wants to ask the co-signers about the letter versus the appendix, I suggest that they do so. But to me, this is a distraction from discussing the contents of the letter.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

According to you none of the "experts" knew how to do their job. My word everyone working the case was incompetent except those who you agree with.

Do you agree with Rinaldi's analysis of the two parallel lines? If you don't, what conclusions do you draw about his objectivity/competence? I have also seen his measurements overlaid on top of the bathmat print itself posted at JREFF, and the discrepancy is risible. Dr. Vinci explained himself in his report, showing that shoe prints don't have parallel lines in the first place; therefore, the premise of his extrapolation was flawed from the start. I think that Dr. Vinci made some good arguments, but I don't happen to believe that the defense experts and their lawyers did an outstanding job, overall. Not terrible, but not perfect, either. MOO.

 

[SMK]

Everyone knows who I am from my blog. I teach biochemistry and organic chemistry at UNC-Wilmington. Thanks for the conversation.

I certainly didn't mean any disrespect.

 

[Myvice]

The person who made the print was definitely not wearing a shoe. My guess is that the killer removed his shoe as he was washing blood from his pant leg and made the print at that time. Dan O. at JREFF has written on this subject in much more detail that I could. I don't claim expertise in the area of footprint analysis, but to my untrained eye it looks a little more like Guede's toe than it looks like Sollecito's toe. Nevertheless, I would not try to match it to anyone, for the reasons that I gave, among others. Ideally, one would give the print and the reference prints to a number of experts in a blind trial.

OK, but it really doesn't seem logical to me that he would wash the blood off his pant leg and take a bloody shoe off to do that. Why wouldn't he want to wash the blood off his shoes as well? JMO

 

[miley]

Thanks. It does sound so confusing when one side says something and the other says something completely different. So I don't know. IIRC I thought they couldn't prove conclusively whether the latest sample was starch or not?

Again though, as other posters have been pointing out, the knife (outlined on the sheet) is consistent w/ all of the wounds. This alleged bleached cleaned knife is hardly consistent but is considered compatible with the fatal wound – the nature of this knife, where the starch was found, corresponds to how deep the knife was inserted. Hellmann acknowledges this in his report.

Considering these crevices attaching the blade and handle would have been seeped in blood, none was found. And as Allisonz pointed out, the prosecution argued against separating the knife from the handle and looking deeper into these crevices. In a quest for truth, this is suspicious.

If the murderers were indeed Amanda and RS (along with Rudy), I believe that they would have cleaned the knife off and put it back in the drawer. IIRC, in one interview, RS tried to say that was a completely ludicrous theory and they (prosecution) just picked up a knife from the kitchen drawer and said "that's the murder weapon." However, I don't think it's that ludicrous of a theory. It seems to me that it the most logical place they would put it, as I said in my post.

We'll have to disagree on this point because putting it back in the drawer is way too convoluted of a scenario for me. However, if you can see problems with the collection of the bra clasp, there are similar problems with the collection of the knife and how it was handled after it ws found which brings chain of custody into play (how rules were broken) I don't have a link off hand to support an explanation but this issue is likely the source for contamination.

I honestly think Rudy was too dumb to think of how to hide the knife.

Guede could have thrown the knife in the river, where he said he threw his nike shoes and likely what happened.
It's possible though, if you notice the terrain surrounding the area of where the phones were found, he could have thrown the knife somewhere along that path and it's just waiting to be discovered - shining example of Rudy's dumb luck strategy.

 

[Cappuccino]

OK, but it really doesn't seem logical to me that he would wash the blood off his pant leg and take a bloody shoe off to do that. Why wouldn't he want to wash the blood off his shoes as well? JMO

I think he would have had to remove the bloody shoes in the first place before he walked from the bedroom to the bathroom, and then held the shoes under the water to wash the blood off. Otherwise, where is the trail of bloody footprints from the bedroom to the bathroom?

 

[Amber29]

Do you agree with Rinaldi's analysis of the two parallel lines? If you don't, what conclusions do you draw about his objectivity/competence? I have also seen his measurements overlaid on top of the bathmat print itself posted at JREFF, and the discrepancy is risible. Dr. Vinci explained himself in his report, showing that shoe prints don't have parallel lines in the first place; therefore, the premise of his extrapolation was flawed from the start. I think that Dr. Vinci made some good arguments, but I don't happen to believe that the defense experts and their lawyers did an outstanding job, overall. Not terrible, but not perfect, either. MOO.

What parallel lines are we talking about? Please provide a link and I will look it over.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

What parallel lines are we talking about? Please provide a link and I will look it over.

Rinaldi claimed that two parallel lines were compatible with the width of Amanda's shoe print. Vinci gave an alternative explanation that makes more sense. The Vinci report is in Italian, but there may be a machine translation available. I have used machine translations of some of the captions, but the figures themselves almost don't need captions. MOO.

 

[whoanellie]

I certainly didn't mean any disrespect.

What did you mean then?

 

[Footwarrior]

I think he would have had to remove the bloody shoes in the first place before he walked from the bedroom to the bathroom, and then held the shoes under the water to wash the blood off. Otherwise, where is the trail of bloody footprints from the bedroom to the bathroom?

It depends on when Rudy stepped in the blood. The most likely scenario is that after killing Meredith, Rudy went to the small bathroom to clean up. He took his shoe off when rinsing the blood off his pants. His shoe was clean at that time. Then he returned to the murder room where he looked for valuables in Meredith's purse and covered the body with the duvet. While doing this, he stepped in the blood. Then he left the shoe print next to the body and the trail going down the hall.

 

[Amber29]

Rinaldi claimed that two parallel lines were compatible with the width of Amanda's shoe print. Vinci gave an alternative explanation that makes more sense. The Vinci report is in Italian, but there may be a machine translation available. I have used machine translations of some of the captions, but the figures themselves almost don't need captions. MOO.

Isn't there always defense experts that are hired to give other possibilities? It's up to the court to decide who they believe and how much weight to give. Personally I believe the print looks like RSs foot. I don't believe people's assumptions that RG washed his pants and in doing so somehow managed to leave Meredith's blood in multiple spots where AKs DNA just happened to be.

 

[Cappuccino]

It depends on when Rudy stepped in the blood. The most likely scenario is that after killing Meredith, Rudy went to the small bathroom to clean up. He took his shoe off when rinsing the blood off his pants. His shoe was clean at that time. Then he returned to the murder room where he looked for valuables in Meredith's purse and covered the body with the duvet. While doing this, he stepped in the blood. Then he left the shoe print next to the body and the trail going down the hall.

Yes, that makes sense too.

 

[SMK]

What did you mean then?

I wasn't really being entirely serious; just tongue in cheek. If I say I meant no disrespect, then that is what I mean.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Isn't there always defense experts that are hired to give other possibilities? It's up to the court to decide who they believe and how much weight to give. Personally I believe the print looks like RSs foot. I don't believe people's assumptions that RG washed his pants and in doing so somehow managed to leave Meredith's blood in multiple spots where AKs DNA just happened to be.

I don't see any a priori reason to assume that the defense's expert witnesses are less competent or objective than the prosecution's expert witnesses. Nor do I see a need to be entirely deferential to a court's opinion. Judges make mistakes, and yes, this includes Hellmann. In a liberal democracy, there should be sufficient transparency for interested observers to come to their own opinions. What did you think of the Vinci report? MOO, as always.

 

[Amber29]

I don't see any a priori reason to assume that the defense's expert witnesses are less competent or objective than the prosecution's expert witnesses. Nor do I see a need to be entirely deferential to a court's opinion. Judges make mistakes, and yes, this includes Hellmann. In a liberal democracy, there should be sufficient transparency for interested observers to come to their own opinions. What did you think of the Vinci report? MOO.

I agree with you in that your first statement can go both ways. I honestly can't gather much from it since I can't read it. Do I think that his analysis of that shoe print completely discounts his findings on the bathmat print? No

 

[Amber29]

I wasn't really being entirely serious; just tongue in cheek. If I say I meant no disrespect, then that is what I mean.

Your winking smiley should've made it clear you were only joking no worries

 

[Myvice]

It depends on when Rudy stepped in the blood. The most likely scenario is that after killing Meredith, Rudy went to the small bathroom to clean up. He took his shoe off when rinsing the blood off his pants. His shoe was clean at that time. Then he returned to the murder room where he looked for valuables in Meredith's purse and covered the body with the duvet. While doing this, he stepped in the blood. Then he left the shoe print next to the body and the trail going down the hall.

So where, in your scenario, did his bare foot get blood on it to leave the print on the mat? Do you believe his foot was drenched in blood but his shoe was not? And how would he get from the bedroom to the bathroom without leaving other bare footprints?

 

[Cappuccino]

So where, in your scenario, did his bare foot get blood on it to leave the print on the mat? Do you believe his foot was drenched in blood but his shoe was not? And how would he get from the bedroom to the bathroom without leaving other bare footprints?

It wasn't his foot that had blood on it. It was the pant leg which dripped water and blood mixed onto the floor and his bare foot that then stepped in it before he put his shoes and socks back on.

 

[miley]

Oh yes....the phones, I completely forgot about the phones being turned off! LOL! All the discussion about DNA has been going on for so long........

Ok, but question about phones is....if this was not pre-planned, how would they have thought to turn their phones off ahead of time? Doesn't that lend itself to it being planned in some way, at least back to the point of time they turned their phones off?

Also, IIRC, their excuse for that is that they didn't want to be disturbed on their "sex and movie" night. Do we have any data on whether or not Amanda and RS did this before during the week (?) they were together at any point (both turning off cell phones)? What about prior to that....did either RS or Amanda have their cell phones turned off for the night in, say, the last 2 or 3 months before that night?

TIA.

The police included Patrick in this phone conspiracy, too. After the murder, he turned off his phone and switched his sim card! so, call it a coincidence, call it a wash or call it whatever, it's just another aspect of the case that's been blown out of proportion because at the end of the day it proves nothing.

 

[Myvice]

It wasn't his foot that had blood on it. It was the pant leg which dripped water and blood mixed onto the floor and his bare foot that then stepped in it before he put his shoes and socks back on.

OK, thanks for sharing your opinion. For me it's just too much of a stretch. I can't imagine him not getting blood on his shoes during the murder but walking in the bedroom after cleaning up and carelessly leaving so much evidence. Could have possibly happened but doesn't seem logical to me. JMO